travel_dude Posted March 2 Author Report Share Posted March 2 3 minutes ago, phoenix66 said: 💯.. the key is be willing to lose the player , but not for nothing . Giving Johnny the benefit of the doubt , that maybe he was torn up to the last second ... Bt still got Burned by the one that was his strength .his relationship with players.. flames were in the same situation as Canucks (except EP was an rfa..ok) contender status .. top player (more realistically his agent) using leverage .. should have sent a message an used TDL as a deadline and threatened to move him if he didn't want to sign . Conroy actually has an opportunity here with Hanifin.. his agent is apparently trying to direcr where he goes .. likely trying to force a sign and trade ..I'd be on board with no home run on hanifin if it sends him to a bottom feeder team for a 2nd( high second just as good as a late first ) so he loses his 8th year So, I believe you can trade a player at TDL and he can sign 8 years with that team. Tkachuk was a different story because he wasn't dealt at TDL. Hanifin would be on a team's reserve list. I think I have that right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 Just now, travel_dude said: So, I believe you can trade a player at TDL and he can sign 8 years with that team. Tkachuk was a different story because he wasn't dealt at TDL. Hanifin would be on a team's reserve list. I think I have that right. I believe you're right..not totally sure .but all the more reason to send him to a bottom feeder he won't likely sign with .. his supposed key teams have nothing to really give us .. the others are being scared off likely because theyve been *wink wink* informed he won't sign there .. take on a bad center or d man contract to get them to give you a second and mid prospect Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 9 minutes ago, travel_dude said: So, I believe you can trade a player at TDL and he can sign 8 years with that team. Tkachuk was a different story because he wasn't dealt at TDL. Hanifin would be on a team's reserve list. I think I have that right. correct 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted March 2 Author Report Share Posted March 2 2 minutes ago, cross16 said: correct I know you have a good handle on the CBA and cap stuff. I sometimes have to go look and sometimes get results that are no longer in the CBA. The way some of the trade conditions work can make you head spin as well. Almost need to write a program to test the possible results. With Hanifin, I am hoping we have a free hand in making a trade. In theory, the only teams that should be scared off should be Canadian teams. I'm sure though that Toronto could convince him, because centre of the universe and BT loves him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 2 minutes ago, travel_dude said: I know you have a good handle on the CBA and cap stuff. I sometimes have to go look and sometimes get results that are no longer in the CBA. The way some of the trade conditions work can make you head spin as well. Almost need to write a program to test the possible results. With Hanifin, I am hoping we have a free hand in making a trade. In theory, the only teams that should be scared off should be Canadian teams. I'm sure though that Toronto could convince him, because centre of the universe and BT loves him. Technically yes, he can traded to 24 teams without his consent ..it comes down to return.. if you know you are getting a pure rental with no chance of signing him.. your offer is likely less than even if you think you have hope.. Boston , Vegas , Florida and Tampa at apparently where his agent is trying to steer him to, but they have no firsts .. limited prospects and less likely to give up a good roster player ahead of the playoffs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 17 hours ago, robrob74 said: to me it sounds like he would have by his comments today. And possibly it's on owners; I only say that from history, getting to a deal with the Wild and then it not working. it’s possible sure I just have no reason to believe it. I think most know I’m not exactly pro flames owners but in this case I just don’t think they got involved. I’m in the camp that this is likely an overreaction to comments that had a different meaning. I don’t think wolf was supposed to start that game he did and I think he was pulled from it thinking a deal was close. Could be as simple as that. Markstrom could be saying heh don’t pull me unless you know I’m gone. but at this point I really don’t see this as a major issue 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 8 minutes ago, cross16 said: it’s possible sure I just have no reason to believe it. I think most know I’m not exactly pro flames owners but in this case I just don’t think they got involved. I’m in the camp that this is likely an overreaction to comments that had a different meaning. I don’t think wolf was supposed to start that game he did and I think he was pulled from it thinking a deal was close. Could be as simple as that. Markstrom could be saying heh don’t pull me unless you know I’m gone. but at this point I really don’t see this as a major issue This exactly.. too much reading between the lines and posting as fact for clicks ..maybe he really was not feeling well ? Eg even if you take as fact the deal fell apart over retention , the assumption was flames walked away..Murray mixed it .. maybe the devil's were the ones that came back and said " our owners want retention" .. or they balked at the full contract for the return .. too many assumptions over one piece of what might be fact I did read an interview with Zucker recently where he said what happened .. the deal was done and agreed but they couldn't reach Edwards who was in the air and couldn't get him on the phone before the deadline passed (yes I know private jets have phones.bu there was some issue Getting him on the phone ) Why he needed Murray's sign off on a trade is a post for another time ..lol.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheersMan Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 I'm reading everything but the obvious here. Conroy had a deal with NJ. Marky nixed the deal because he did not like the destination. Marky is pissed because he was not asked to waive his NMC before Flames brought him the deal. Still a week to sort this out.... but NJ is now losing interest the further they slip back in the standings. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 I think Markstrom is mad simply because trade talks leaked and now he has to go to work and face his teammates and it's uncomfortable. Trade talks should be private, confidential, and secret. I believe he's pointing the finger at Conroy when he mentions the upper guys meaning he's not doing business professionally. I don't think he's mad at waiving, salary retention, owners nixing, etc. simply that it leaked and the public knows. And well, Conroy did say he's going to consult his inner group much more than BT ever did so, there's going to be more leaks than in years past as a result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 2 hours ago, phoenix66 said: I'll never be a fan of the Canucks ..but let this be a lesson for the next Johnny type scenario... VC.. let's extend EP.. were not talking during the season . VC.. were trading you to Carolina EP wait what ? Congrats to the Canucks. I too cannot cheer for them though. I was hoping they would lose Pettersson this summer. He's one of the smartest players in the game. $11.6-mil is a steal all things considered. I'm taking Pettersson over Nylander 10 times out of 10. I thought Pettersson would come in closer to Austom Matthews around $13-mil-per. And yes, these signings always go back to BT because BT would nickle and dime his young stars and then turn around and throw money at depth players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sak22 Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 2 hours ago, phoenix66 said: This exactly.. too much reading between the lines and posting as fact for clicks ..maybe he really was not feeling well ? Eg even if you take as fact the deal fell apart over retention , the assumption was flames walked away..Murray mixed it .. maybe the devil's were the ones that came back and said " our owners want retention" .. or they balked at the full contract for the return .. too many assumptions over one piece of what might be fact I did read an interview with Zucker recently where he said what happened .. the deal was done and agreed but they couldn't reach Edwards who was in the air and couldn't get him on the phone before the deadline passed (yes I know private jets have phones.bu there was some issue Getting him on the phone ) Why he needed Murray's sign off on a trade is a post for another time ..lol.. Term is one thing, dealing 1sts in multiple years is another thing the organization doesn't strive to do. I put the Zucker move as a dodged bullet, he wouldn't have moved any needle here and would've cost Pelts and who knows what else. Do find it funny the owner intervened moves that get the most criticism both Zucker and Bishop would've been bad moves. If only they shot down the Neal, Brouwer contracts or the Hamonic trade. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 39 minutes ago, The_People1 said: I think Markstrom is mad simply because trade talks leaked and now he has to go to work and face his teammates and it's uncomfortable. Trade talks should be private, confidential, and secret. I believe he's pointing the finger at Conroy when he mentions the upper guys meaning he's not doing business professionally. I don't think he's mad at waiving, salary retention, owners nixing, etc. simply that it leaked and the public knows. And well, Conroy did say he's going to consult his inner group much more than BT ever did so, there's going to be more leaks than in years past as a result. I think it's more likely he's upset it wasn't dispelled.. I still highly doubt any leak came from the flames camp.. makes no sense and it would serve no value .. Makes more sense his initial comments about he wouldnt say no started a snowball.. Teams made calls.. agents leaked info .. pressure was on .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 Interesting.. 2 years left .. stop gap center .. I could see us claiming .. Wouid actually make a ton of sense .. He doesn't count against the cap yet, We need a center .. we likely would have to get one in UFA anyway .. the kids need to play with somebody with skill We have the room especially considering we are about to move out 2.5-5M in hanifin .. Waivers bypasses his NTC.. and at either of the next 2 TDLs any pick you flip him for is a win.. Not to mention.. add a skilled Russian to play with Kuzmenko Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob74 Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 36 minutes ago, phoenix66 said: Interesting.. 2 years left .. stop gap center .. I could see us claiming .. the Flames seem to be ok with Coke guys. They had Huddler, maybe Johnny and then Ruzicka. I know it happens when people have money, but I've heard a few players had those kinds of problems. Rumours of course. Kipper was my favourite player of all time, but my beer league hockey team here talked at the time always talked about how coked up he was. Maybe it's a goalie thing for being alert. Grant Fuhr was another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTech780 Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 39 minutes ago, phoenix66 said: Interesting.. 2 years left .. stop gap center .. I could see us claiming .. Wouid actually make a ton of sense .. He doesn't count against the cap yet, We need a center .. we likely would have to get one in UFA anyway .. the kids need to play with somebody with skill We have the room especially considering we are about to move out 2.5-5M in hanifin .. Waivers bypasses his NTC.. and at either of the next 2 TDLs any pick you flip him for is a win.. Not to mention.. add a skilled Russian to play with Kuzmenko I don’t think he is the type of player you want around your young players, IMO I wouldn’t bring him in. Not to mention I wouldn’t want to take that cap hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 Absolutely zero sense to claim. make Washington give you an asset if you want to weaponize the space but he make no sense to claim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 Just now, JTech780 said: I don’t think he is the type of player you want around your young players, IMO I wouldn’t bring him in. Not to mention I wouldn’t want to take that cap hit. You mean someone who admitted he had a problem and sought help for it ? What a bad message to send kids.. dont admit your problems kids ..never seek help ..it only ends badly... flames also have one of the best on staff counsellors in the league. And who cares about the cap hit? Even team tank should be all over this .there is literally no risk.. only upside .. Keep the games exciting.. .. bleed chances and lose..while at the same time get your kids playing with skill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted March 2 Author Report Share Posted March 2 4 minutes ago, robrob74 said: the Flames seem to be ok with Coke guys. They had Huddler, maybe Johnny and then Ruzicka. I know it happens when people have money, but I've heard a few players had those kinds of problems. Rumours of course. Kipper was my favourite player of all time, but my beer league hockey team here talked at the time always talked about how coked up he was. Maybe it's a goalie thing for being alert. Grant Fuhr was another. I think you should be a little more carefull about saying that kind of things out loud. It's not very respectful. Talk about that stuff in beer leagues. Who really knows when Ruzicka even started that. Perhaps after he got waived and picked up by a basement team who wouldn't play him. Or that was the reason we waived him. We never were accomodating for drug users. Nyway, not trying to trash you, just stop spreading rumors please. That's my request as a fan, not a mod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 1 minute ago, cross16 said: Absolutely zero sense to claim. make Washington give you an asset if you want to weaponize the space but he make no sense to claim Actually thought about that.. now this is obviously a fat out there take ..but not impossible to believe .. Caps were one of the teams supposedly sniffing on hanifin.. what if by putting him on waivers knowing Calgary would put in a claim (as Calgary is probabaly on his nt list) and if successful it's considered as a *wink* part of the trade ..caps only then have to give a pick and a prospect .. and if some other team gets him ..well then caps still win by clearing the space and there a plan b Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 19 minutes ago, phoenix66 said: Actually thought about that.. now this is obviously a fat out there take ..but not impossible to believe .. Caps were one of the teams supposedly sniffing on hanifin.. what if by putting him on waivers knowing Calgary would put in a claim (as Calgary is probabaly on his nt list) and if successful it's considered as a *wink* part of the trade ..caps only then have to give a pick and a prospect .. and if some other team gets him ..well then caps still win by clearing the space and there a plan b that is an awful strategy from Conroy. Kuznetsov has negative trade value. Washington should be giving you something to take him. strategy isn’t that far out there. Columbus did it with Marchant back in the day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 30 minutes ago, cross16 said: that is an awful strategy from Conroy. Kuznetsov has negative trade value. Washington should be giving you something to take him. strategy isn’t that far out there. Columbus did it with Marchant back in the day You're not wrong..but I'd say he's a decent tdl flip.. even if you get a 5th it's still a win.. we need a center ..we don't have one .. so it's not like he's holding a kid back.. and on the flip side if he clicks with Kuzmenko . You win twice As far is washington is concerned ..gm said he wants a change of scenery.. they don't give up a roster player per se.. and can still pad with the pick and prospect.. all together it's like the Lindholm return (except kuzmenko is younger ) .. we have the room and by the time we truly need it he'll be gone I truly don't see the downside here And to add to the conspiracy theory..say he clears waivers and is willing to come here .. now wash can maybe eat some salary.. add some sweetener .and we can put him right on the wranglers until he's ready Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conundrumed Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 52 minutes ago, robrob74 said: the Flames seem to be ok with Coke guys. They had Huddler, maybe Johnny and then Ruzicka. I know it happens when people have money, but I've heard a few players had those kinds of problems. Rumours of course. Kipper was my favourite player of all time, but my beer league hockey team here talked at the time always talked about how coked up he was. Maybe it's a goalie thing for being alert. Grant Fuhr was another. The entire NHL is littered with players that like the devil's dandruff recreationally. It's fairly well known. I can easily name 20 that haven't been publicized. It's pretty widespread. Every time a story breaks, I just go, "yup". 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sak22 Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 7 minutes ago, sak22 said: Problem is they really dont have much to give.. ? Without picks it pretty much has to start with Lundell +.. and I can't see them doing that . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sak22 Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 2 minutes ago, conundrumed said: The entire NHL is littered with players that like the devil's dandruff recreationally. It's fairly well known. I can easily name 20 that haven't been publicized. It's pretty widespread. Every time a story breaks, I just go, "yup". At this point very few players would throw me off guard if they ever had anything negative come out about them off ice. I've seen players (Flames and opponents) have hard times walking in clubs the night before a game only for them to have amazing games the next night. Philly made Carter and Richards out like alcoholics who put partying above hockey only to watch them win in year 1 after trading while they became the Flames of the East. 1 minute ago, phoenix66 said: Problem is they really dont have much to give.. ? Without picks it pretty much has to start with Lundell +.. and I can't see them doing that . Neither do Tampa or Boston. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now