Realistic (and unrealistic) Trades - 2024 Edition

[cross16]

Solid deal. Not exiting but it was what I was expecting for Tanev. I know the first was rumored but I had a hard time seeing it. I’m a bit surprised they didn’t wait longer to see if someone blinked closer to the deadline but there is risk in doing that too. 
 

Prospect sounds like a B to B minus level guy which i would say if you get that and a 2nd you’ve basically gotten the value of a first. He has limited skill set which is a challenge for sure, but playing full time as a 20 year old in the A coming straight from the O is pretty decent. 
 

Conroy has done a nice job building up some D depth. 

[travel_dude]

39 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Solid deal. Not exiting but it was what I was expecting for Tanev. I know the first was rumored but I had a hard time seeing it. I’m a bit surprised they didn’t wait longer to see if someone blinked closer to the deadline but there is risk in doing that too. 
 

Prospect sounds like a B to B minus level guy which i would say if you get that and a 2nd you’ve basically gotten the value of a first. He has limited skill set which is a challenge for sure, but playing full time as a 20 year old in the A coming straight from the O is pretty decent. 
 

Conroy has done a nice job building up some D depth. 

 

I was flipping through twiiter and was amazed how negative the reviews were.  

I don't have an issue getting back a defensive D prospect and a 2nd.

I wasn't so happy with retaining 50%, perhaps that's the conditional 3rd, but it's

not the end of the world.  From what I understand, they have scouted this player

over the last couple of weeks?  They like his poise and PK ability.

Whatever.  He's a young prospect that could become a lot better with time.

 

I would like to see some forwards in any Hanifin trade.  Prospects or young players.

May not get more than one, but should get a pick(s) if just one.  A first should be a

given.

 

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

I was flipping through twiiter and was amazed how negative the reviews were.  

I don't have an issue getting back a defensive D prospect and a 2nd.

I wasn't so happy with retaining 50%, perhaps that's the conditional 3rd, but it's

not the end of the world.  From what I understand, they have scouted this player

over the last couple of weeks?  They like his poise and PK ability.

Whatever.  He's a young prospect that could become a lot better with time.

 

I would like to see some forwards in any Hanifin trade.  Prospects or young players.

May not get more than one, but should get a pick(s) if just one.  A first should be a

given.

 

I don't remember verbatim, it sounded like he was either scouted or coached by the minor league guy when in Junior. I know, not the greatest of reads here, but I think they had eyes on him in Jr is what someone said on the bonus Flames Talk they had after the trade tonight. 
 

if you go listen you'd get a better picture than what I'm painting here. I'm painting more a Picasso than a Rembrandt here.... vague abstract. 

[phoenix66]

 

It's nice to see Treliving still hasn'tost his touch 

😎

[MP5029]

Ok so, a few points of note:

 

1. moving Tanev and eventually Hanifin is not good, but must be done.  If your moving 1/3 of you defenders which took 1/2 the season the gel in to what is arguably the best D core around the NHL..you may as well move markstrom, no way he continues to be as good with out those two in the lineup.  Not a knock on Markstrom whatsoever, it’s just a huge change for any goalie and team to adjust to.  At this point, I’d suggest may as well move Markstrom now while the value is high rather than risk him showing poorly over the stretch and getting nothing or very little for him over the summer or in a few years when he will be like 36 ish as a UFA and probably no where near as good…moving him to say a NJD team with a young strong D would keep him showing well and should net a reasonable return.  I think moving Markstrom is the smart play at this point, it’s a win for NJD, Cgy and Markstrom short and long term.

 

2. Tanev is a rental, if you were looking to get a 1st last year was the time to trade him, as a rental your capped at pretty much what Cgy got, unless your trading for a UFA star player, this is top value…and TBH it’s a smart trade, they are getting something they down have in the pipe line…a possible Tanev replacement, and where D take a longer time to develop this is kind of an acceleration of development to on ice product…smart!

 

2. with the D from VCR, the new guy from Dal and who is already in the pipe line the future D looks promising.  This also opens the door for Cgy to focus on Ctr’s at the draft and with any luck maybe it’s a kid named Iginla?!

 

All and all, I like what Conroy is doing, I like that his focus is not on Draft picks, rather prospects, they are closer to playing real games, they can be projected better than a draft pick, unless it’s like 1st OA…but even then it’s not 100% look at the flops they have had in Edm 

[phoenix66]

7 hours ago, cross16 said:

Solid deal. Not exiting but it was what I was expecting for Tanev. I know the first was rumored but I had a hard time seeing it. I’m a bit surprised they didn’t wait longer to see if someone blinked closer to the deadline but there is risk in doing that too. 
 

Prospect sounds like a B to B minus level guy which i would say if you get that and a 2nd you’ve basically gotten the value of a first. He has limited skill set which is a challenge for sure, but playing full time as a 20 year old in the A coming straight from the O is pretty decent. 
 

Conroy has done a nice job building up some D depth. 

Agreed .. everything I've been reading on the kid screams Young Chris Tanev..

Great one on one defender , not flashy but great defensively, great skater..blocks shots , can be physical .. does all the simple things at a high level.. essentially a top shut down defender ..we have a good stable of offensive D coming up.. a solid shutdown guy is a good add 

 

Picked in the same area as our second rounder so our scouts likely have a decent book on him .. and Stars have a history of drafting well and they saw enough in him to take him in the second .. all in all a very solid add 

[cross16]

10 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

All the more curious why they would bother asking us to retain some of Marky's salary.

NJ got hosed unless they hated the goalie and love a 4th.

 

You can't trade cap space for nothing anymore, so NJ has to put the goalie in there in order to get the 4th.  So either they don't like him or don't plan on signing him, but he is in the deal to get the pick.

 

NJ has a lot of flexibility this year but next year it tightens up with both Mercer and Toffoli needing deals. 2 different things when it comes to retaining salary. 

[cross16]

8 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I was flipping through twiiter and was amazed how negative the reviews were.  

I don't have an issue getting back a defensive D prospect and a 2nd.

I wasn't so happy with retaining 50%, perhaps that's the conditional 3rd, but it's

not the end of the world.  From what I understand, they have scouted this player

over the last couple of weeks?  They like his poise and PK ability.

Whatever.  He's a young prospect that could become a lot better with time.

 

I would like to see some forwards in any Hanifin trade.  Prospects or young players.

May not get more than one, but should get a pick(s) if just one.  A first should be a

given.

 

 

Sounds like, from Conroy anyway, that's what got them the prospect. Dallas didn't want to give him up. 

[phoenix66]

8 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I was flipping through twiiter and was amazed how negative the reviews were.  

I don't have an issue getting back a defensive D prospect and a 2nd.

I wasn't so happy with retaining 50%, perhaps that's the conditional 3rd, but it's

not the end of the world.  From what I understand, they have scouted this player

over the last couple of weeks?  They like his poise and PK ability.

Whatever.  He's a young prospect that could become a lot better with time.

 

I would like to see some forwards in any Hanifin trade.  Prospects or young players.

May not get more than one, but should get a pick(s) if just one.  A first should be a

given.

 

I'm getting huge chuckles on Twitter right now ...lost the trade ..the kids a scrub.. Toronto fans saying dodged a bullet and will just sign him for free in the summer to a 2x$3m..(obviously don't know BT..he'll sign him to a 5x$6m lol) 

 

The funny thing is ..we traded a low offensive dman who is a top shut down guy..  for essentially a young Tanev and a lottery ticket and people can't see the positive here..

 

 

And actually I think it's more than a couple weeks ..he was drafted near our second rounder that year so their book must go back further than that ..

[cberg]

12 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Well I don't think he has earned prime time yet over the awesome Oesterle.

If anything, they move Kylington to Weegar and Hanifin to Ras.

That leaves open Gilbert or Oesterle with Pachal.

Neither of them should be in the top 6, but we shall see.

New guy is a LHS, so COULD pair with Pachal, but maybe shouldn't yet.

He's 20.  Solo deserves it first.

Or perhaps they go for the field goal from 50 yard line and call up Poirier.

Agree it is likely Gilbert, but still season left and Wranglers right in Calgary, so Flames management should get a good read on him quickly.

[cross16]

I don't question the value here  but I do think it's fair to question the approach. 

 

Most of the opinions out there pre trade where Tanev should get you a first straight up and maybe a conditional 3rd/4th.  That would also put them in the same category of the David Savard trade. Behind the Chariot trade but that's a tough one to comp too as it's turned out to be a high water market. 

 

If you assign a 2nd round value to the prospect, probably fair IMO, then the 2nd they got, plus that value would equal a first.  I don't think Dallas was giving you a 1st and this prospect as IMO that would exceed the Savard trade. The big questions is if conroy had of waited could he have gotten a first out of another team? I can't say yes but my gut says he would have. Not a 1st and a prospect, but a 1st. 

 

So what do you value more is the question? I think it's clear the Flames wanted this prospect and valued him more than a move from late 50s to the late 20s. Late first round picks are probably the most overrated asset across fans so I get the approach. I got the sense from hearing Conroy speak about the deal that a first round pick could have been an option but it would have meant passing up this prospect.

 

I also think it's fair to be disappointed in the prospect because players with his profile almost never make the NHL so there is some risk there when looking at the deal. He has the profile that I hate drafting but I am very ok acquiring it via trade.

 

So all in all, I do get why the response is negative because on the surface there are some fair things to question about the deal. It's not a home run but it's solid in my books because I think the value is in the ballpark and I don't mind the prospect. 

 

Just think some of the reaction to this deal is fair. 

[phoenix66]

Personally I think the first narrative came Into play because of Toronto, being that's all they had to offer ..Conny did mention a second was the starting point the whole time ..so it really does come down to the prospect.. I'd be curious what Tanevs "card" looks like from when he was a rookie ..anybody who has actually scouted him seems to love him.. ..not for one second saying he's gonna be a #1 d.. but neither was Tanev.. a top shutdown guy with speed to defend one on one has a future if he keeps developing 

[jjgallow]

12 minutes ago, cross16 said:

I don't question the value here  but I do think it's fair to question the approach. 

 

Most of the opinions out there pre trade where Tanev should get you a first straight up and maybe a conditional 3rd/4th.  That would also put them in the same category of the David Savard trade. Behind the Chariot trade but that's a tough one to comp too as it's turned out to be a high water market. 

 

If you assign a 2nd round value to the prospect, probably fair IMO, then the 2nd they got, plus that value would equal a first.  I don't think Dallas was giving you a 1st and this prospect as IMO that would exceed the Savard trade. The big questions is if conroy had of waited could he have gotten a first out of another team? I can't say yes but my gut says he would have. Not a 1st and a prospect, but a 1st. 

 

So what do you value more is the question? I think it's clear the Flames wanted this prospect and valued him more than a move from late 50s to the late 20s. Late first round picks are probably the most overrated asset across fans so I get the approach. I got the sense from hearing Conroy speak about the deal that a first round pick could have been an option but it would have meant passing up this prospect.

 

I also think it's fair to be disappointed in the prospect because players with his profile almost never make the NHL so there is some risk there when looking at the deal. He has the profile that I hate drafting but I am very ok acquiring it via trade.

 

So all in all, I do get why the response is negative because on the surface there are some fair things to question about the deal. It's not a home run but it's solid in my books because I think the value is in the ballpark and I don't mind the prospect. 

 

Just think some of the reaction to this deal is fair. 

 

I'm definitely not idolizing Conroy on this like the Lindholm trade, but,

 

Quite frankly, Tanev is 34 years old, injured on a monthly basis, and limited to specific roles (super important roles mind you).

 

I would agree with you that had Conroy waited, there is a chance we would have got a 1st.

 

However, there is also a chance he gets injured next week (a very real chance) and we get nothing.

 

 

Of all the things you listed above, I would also agree that the draft pick is the most important.   However, there is One thing...more important than that draft pick.     

 

Our existing 1st pick.

 

The nuts and bolts of it is, this trade (specifically because it was done on time) will probably  notch that pick up 1-3 spots.   I know that's a larger question.  But the reality is those 1-3 spots are almost a Tanev value player on their own.

[travel_dude]

54 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

I'm getting huge chuckles on Twitter right now ...lost the trade ..the kids a scrub.. Toronto fans saying dodged a bullet and will just sign him for free in the summer to a 2x$3m..(obviously don't know BT..he'll sign him to a 5x$6m lol) 

 

The funny thing is ..we traded a low offensive dman who is a top shut down guy..  for essentially a young Tanev and a lottery ticket and people can't see the positive here..

 

 

And actually I think it's more than a couple weeks ..he was drafted near our second rounder that year so their book must go back further than that ..

 

Leafs fans can speculate he will sign there for that cheap.  If that was all he wanted, the Flames would have given it to him.  I don't know that I heard an actual number he wanted or if he wanted more term, but I think his defensive numbers earned him at least what he was making.  Whatever he signs for in term, this will be his last deal before the dreaded 35+ contract.  

 

So, there's only a couple of scenarios that improve our draft odds, well actually one.

Stars aren't division leader and lose in the first round.

The 2026 3rd is added if they make it to the cup finals but hurts our 2024 2nd.

 

I don't really care to that point of analysis.  Too far out at this point.  We will see how they place this year.

[The_People1]

2 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I'm definitely not idolizing Conroy on this like the Lindholm trade, but,

 

Quite frankly, Tanev is 34 years old, injured on a monthly basis, and limited to specific roles (super important roles mind you).

 

I would agree with you that had Conroy waited, there is a chance we would have got a 1st.

 

However, there is also a chance he gets injured next week (a very real chance) and we get nothing.

 

 

Of all the things you listed above, I would also agree that the draft pick is the most important.   However, there is One thing...more important than that draft pick.     

 

Our existing 1st pick.

 

The nuts and bolts of it is, this trade (specifically because it was done on time) will probably  notch that pick up 1-3 spots.   I know that's a larger question.  But the reality is those 1-3 spots are almost a Tanev value player on their own.

 

Trues.

 

At the end of the day, this version of Tanev is not the same Tanev of 2 seasons ago.  He's "slightly" over the hill.  He's also probably not 100% healthy (and never will be again).

 

Two years ago we could've gotten a 1st + top prospect + NHL player.

 

I mean, this is a lesson for holding onto Markstrom.  If we try to trade him in his UFA year, we're probably looking at a 3rd round pick max.  If we trade him today, then maybe 1st + Mercer + Holtz...

 

There was reasons to hold onto Tanev two years ago, obviously.  There is no reason to hold onto Markstrom today.  Team is not going the same directions.  Gets the 3 young assets for Markstrom while we can.

[travel_dude]

3 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I'm definitely not idolizing Conroy on this like the Lindholm trade, but,

 

Quite frankly, Tanev is 34 years old, injured on a monthly basis, and limited to specific roles (super important roles mind you).

 

I would agree with you that had Conroy waited, there is a chance we would have got a 1st.

 

However, there is also a chance he gets injured next week (a very real chance) and we get nothing.

 

 

Of all the things you listed above, I would also agree that the draft pick is the most important.   However, there is One thing...more important than that draft pick.     

 

Our existing 1st pick.

 

The nuts and bolts of it is, this trade (specifically because it was done on time) will probably  notch that pick up 1-3 spots.   I know that's a larger question.  But the reality is those 1-3 spots are almost a Tanev value player on their own.

 

The risk of holding your cards is also that teams move on and you get a lesser offer.  Right now there are fewer teams that have signaled no compete.  

 

I am glad not to have to see him in Leafs blue or Oiler puke-orange.  All the Oilers could provide would be the 1st.  Not exactly impressed with a lot of their propsects.  BT making a deal with us?  Only if we completely drained their prospect pool and a 1st.

[travel_dude]

1 minute ago, The_People1 said:

 

Trues.

 

At the end of the day, this version of Tanev is not the same Tanev of 2 seasons ago.  He's "slightly" over the hill.  He's also probably not 100% healthy (and never will be again).

 

Two years ago we could've gotten a 1st + top prospect + NHL player.

 

I mean, this is a lesson for holding onto Markstrom.  If we try to trade him in his UFA year, we're probably looking at a 3rd round pick max.  If we trade him today, then maybe 1st + Mercer + Holtz...

 

There was reasons to hold onto Tanev two years ago, obviously.  There is no reason to hold onto Markstrom today.  Team is not going the same directions.  Gets the 3 young assets for Markstrom while we can.

 

2 years ago?  The year we won the Pacific and were 2nd in the league?  On one hand you trade while the players are at the top of their game, but on the other we were expected to complete for the cup.  Hard to sell then.  The best time to trade him would have been that summer but he got messed up against Dallas.  Big questions for making a trade then.

[phoenix66]

7 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Leafs fans can speculate he will sign there for that cheap.  If that was all he wanted, the Flames would have given it to him.  I don't know that I heard an actual number he wanted or if he wanted more term, but I think his defensive numbers earned him at least what he was making.  Whatever he signs for in term, this will be his last deal before the dreaded 35+ contract.  

 

So, there's only a couple of scenarios that improve our draft odds, well actually one.

Stars aren't division leader and lose in the first round.

The 2026 3rd is added if they make it to the cup finals but hurts our 2024 2nd.

 

I don't really care to that point of analysis.  Too far out at this point.  We will see how they place this year.

Actually the ideal scenario is Dallas beats Vancouver in the WCF..then both the trade conditios get met .. I got no problem cheering for Dallas over Vancouver 😎

 

Runner up is they both lose in the first round ..then the 1st and second get better 

[The_People1]

7 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Leafs fans can speculate he will sign there for that cheap.  If that was all he wanted, the Flames would have given it to him.  I don't know that I heard an actual number he wanted or if he wanted more term, but I think his defensive numbers earned him at least what he was making.  Whatever he signs for in term, this will be his last deal before the dreaded 35+ contract.  

 

So, there's only a couple of scenarios that improve our draft odds, well actually one.

Stars aren't division leader and lose in the first round.

The 2026 3rd is added if they make it to the cup finals but hurts our 2024 2nd.

 

I don't really care to that point of analysis.  Too far out at this point.  We will see how they place this year.

 

I never heard the Flames were engaging in extension talks with Tanev, only Hanifin.  But word was Tanev wanted a 3/4-year deal.  I mean, no thanks.

 

It's similar to the Toffoli situation.  Conroy didn't want to pay an aging player to term.  Tanev was a great player and all but, sorry.

[The_People1]

2 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

2 years ago?  The year we won the Pacific and were 2nd in the league?  On one hand you trade while the players are at the top of their game, but on the other we were expected to complete for the cup.  Hard to sell then.  The best time to trade him would have been that summer but he got messed up against Dallas.  Big questions for making a trade then.

 

Thanks because that's exactly what I said.

 

Are we in the same situation with Markstrom today?  No.  So we should sell high on Markstrom absolutely.

[The_Tribal Chief]

You Cant Expect A fantastic Deal with a Rental player the Hanifan deal isnt gonna be the greatest either and cause he is a rental unless it is a sign and trade witch raises the value the rental portion really tanks the Value of anyone

[phoenix66]

4 minutes ago, The_Tribal Chief said:

You Cant Expect A fantastic Deal with a Rental player the Hanifan deal isnt gonna be the greatest either and cause he is a rental unless it is a sign and trande witch raises the value the rental portion really tanks the Value of anyone

And add to that hanifin's camp isn't helping by leaking were he likely only wants to sign .. lowers the return from teams when they know they're only getting a rental 

[The_Tribal Chief]

Mind that im not saying it is a bad Deal you just have to taper expectation on what to expect from these players

[cross16]

28 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

 

 

Our existing 1st pick.

 

The nuts and bolts of it is, this trade (specifically because it was done on time) will probably  notch that pick up 1-3 spots.   I know that's a larger question.  But the reality is those 1-3 spots are almost a Tanev value player on their own.

 

The injury risk is real and fair.

 

Flames currently sit in the 14th with 3 games to go before the deadline. Unless you were projecting them to win all 3 with Tanev and now think they are going to lose all 3 then this trade has almost no impact on their own first round pick. Nor is the value of 14th to 11 worth 2 2nd round picks. 

 

[The_Tribal Chief]

Is the player from The Stars Coming up or Staying in Ahl