Realistic (and unrealistic) Trades - 2024 Edition

[phoenix66]

5 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

It's a good deal though.  Markstrom gets us a 7oa as long as we take back Korpisalo who could back-up Wolf.  Vladar is total garbage to be honest.  No one would want him for free on waivers.  Korpisalo has posted decent seasons in years past and there's reason to believe he can up his value next year and then we can trade him away if we want to.  Markstrom for 7oa is a massive win in itself.

If it were handed to us a final take it or leave it offer.. it is still a win... But I'd be very reluctant to take on Korpisalo..also with an 10 team no trade list makes him even more of an albatross 

Wolf's best /proper progression is to be the #2 next year ..so that scenario would make Korpy the guy 

[The_People1]

7 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

If it were handed to us a final take it or leave it offer.. it is still a win... But I'd be very reluctant to take on Korpisalo..also with an 10 team no trade list makes him even more of an albatross 

Wolf's best /proper progression is to be the #2 next year ..so that scenario would make Korpy the guy 

 

The Flames are expected to be bad the next two to four years anyways.  Better to have Korpisalo take the Ls than Wolf.  Korpisalo is the perfect punching bag vet for a tankathon team.  But just saying, Korpisalo has had success in the past.  He could improve his numbers and make himself tradeable again.  10 team NTC or whatever, let's get him first and pump his stats back up.

 

Meanwhile, we add a 7oa who could potentially become a core player moving forward.

[sak22]

God the draft can't come soon enough.  So tired of living in fantasy land.

[tmac70]

Will side with the wait to get as close to your ask as possible crowd. I have heard ownership on this side quashed the deal but also NJ squashed it because the ask was to high when retention was requested. Despite the blame game of who did what, really its what needs to happen to make everyone happy with the deal. Regardless, Marky as much as he may want out is still under contract, he will play and will be a professional about it. 

 

My concern lies after the fact, with Wolf and the team.  if we do not get a better d situation you're setting this kid up for failure and creating a losing culture based on the HOPE these kids pull you into contention 5 years from now. Plus there is no way ownership, upper management, and veterans are going to side and be anywhere comfortable with a rebuild, retool I can see. Who wants to be in a losing culture anyway!!! If you move Marky and Mags whats that bring us to in cap space? We also know that this club spends to the max. 

 

As much energy is put into what a potential trade maybe, IMHO one should be looking at who is coming in via UFA or trades for next season. Your going to see a lot of places holders on 3- 4 year UFA contracts I think

[phoenix66]

2 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

Will side with the wait to get as close to your ask as possible crowd. I have heard ownership on this side quashed the deal but also NJ squashed it because the ask was to high when retention was requested. Despite the blame game of who did what, really its what needs to happen to make everyone happy with the deal. Regardless, Marky as much as he may want out is still under contract, he will play and will be a professional about it. 

 

My concern lies after the fact, with Wolf and the team.  if we do not get a better d situation you're setting this kid up for failure and creating a losing culture based on the HOPE these kids pull you into contention 5 years from now. Plus there is no way ownership, upper management, and veterans are going to side and be anywhere comfortable with a rebuild, retool I can see. Who wants to be in a losing culture anyway!!! If you move Marky and Mags whats that bring us to in cap space? We also know that this club spends to the max. 

 

As much energy is put into what a potential trade maybe, IMHO one should be looking at who is coming in via UFA or trades for next season. Your going to see a lot of places holders on 3- 4 year UFA contracts I think

💯... That is why I say expect a Talbot like signing if we trade Marky.. expect a short deal for some older centers like a Marchesshault or Stephenson .. definitely some solid D ..Forborts.. etc..

Placeholders in our areas of need to teach the kids ..keep the winning mentality.

Players like Killington benefit from the Tanevs of the world .. we see what Kadri has done for Zary (and vice versa ) 

 

As much as some want it ..and as much a we are committed to getting the kids playing..we will not play the tank game .. goal from day one of each season is playoffs..that's just the directive of this team..

[robrob74]

6 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

Will side with the wait to get as close to your ask as possible crowd. I have heard ownership on this side quashed the deal but also NJ squashed it because the ask was to high when retention was requested. Despite the blame game of who did what, really its what needs to happen to make everyone happy with the deal. Regardless, Marky as much as he may want out is still under contract, he will play and will be a professional about it. 

 

My concern lies after the fact, with Wolf and the team.  if we do not get a better d situation you're setting this kid up for failure and creating a losing culture based on the HOPE these kids pull you into contention 5 years from now. Plus there is no way ownership, upper management, and veterans are going to side and be anywhere comfortable with a rebuild, retool I can see. Who wants to be in a losing culture anyway!!! If you move Marky and Mags whats that bring us to in cap space? We also know that this club spends to the max. 

 

As much energy is put into what a potential trade maybe, IMHO one should be looking at who is coming in via UFA or trades for next season. Your going to see a lot of places holders on 3- 4 year UFA contracts I think

 

I agree! Conroy has been vigilant in getting players that can be serviceable or good in deals. So the bet is that he does the same, plus signs a few guys to try and be competitive. I doubt the team will be drafting in the top 5 next year. 

[travel_dude]

50 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

It's a good deal though.  Markstrom gets us a 7oa as long as we take back Korpisalo who could back-up Wolf.  Vladar is total garbage to be honest.  No one would want him for free on waivers.  Korpisalo has posted decent seasons in years past and there's reason to believe he can up his value next year and then we can trade him away if we want to.  Markstrom for 7oa is a massive win in itself.

 

You mean the 11 games he played with the Kings or the seasons he was a backup and played 30+ games only? His best year was behind Seth Jones.  Also this was the last time he won more than he lost. 

[travel_dude]

54 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

It's a good deal though.  Markstrom gets us a 7oa as long as we take back Korpisalo who could back-up Wolf.  Vladar is total garbage to be honest.  No one would want him for free on waivers.  Korpisalo has posted decent seasons in years past and there's reason to believe he can up his value next year and then we can trade him away if we want to.  Markstrom for 7oa is a massive win in itself.

 

It's great pick as part of the overall return no doubt.  And in goalie trade terms it's probably fair to really good.  What lets this down is getting stuck with a goalie that has not been very good.  If Vladar is crap, what is Korpi?

[phoenix66]

Just now, travel_dude said:

 

It's great pick as part of the overall return no doubt.  And in goalie trade terms it's probably fair to really good.  What lets this down is getting stuck with a goalie that has not been very good.  If Vladar is crap, what is Korpi?

Another wrinkle to this ..are we really thinking we're not on his 10 team list ? 

Dunno .I'd take it if it meant the #7 and no retention on Marky but I just see it being an albatross ..  saving grace is it's a no trade not an NMC so could always bury him in the A if he's the second coming of year #2 Hiller

[travel_dude]

18 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

Will side with the wait to get as close to your ask as possible crowd. I have heard ownership on this side quashed the deal but also NJ squashed it because the ask was to high when retention was requested. Despite the blame game of who did what, really its what needs to happen to make everyone happy with the deal. Regardless, Marky as much as he may want out is still under contract, he will play and will be a professional about it. 

 

My concern lies after the fact, with Wolf and the team.  if we do not get a better d situation you're setting this kid up for failure and creating a losing culture based on the HOPE these kids pull you into contention 5 years from now. Plus there is no way ownership, upper management, and veterans are going to side and be anywhere comfortable with a rebuild, retool I can see. Who wants to be in a losing culture anyway!!! If you move Marky and Mags whats that bring us to in cap space? We also know that this club spends to the max. 

 

As much energy is put into what a potential trade maybe, IMHO one should be looking at who is coming in via UFA or trades for next season. Your going to see a lot of places holders on 3- 4 year UFA contracts I think

 

I think the idea is you try out the new tandem of goalie and see where you are.  The current situation will not allow that to happen.  Seeing as the current version of the Flames was not really any better with or without Markstrom in nets, I don't think trading him would be a rebuild.  He is not a long term answer so if you get only a year out of Wold/Vladar before you need to upgrade, it's really not that much different.

[travel_dude]

1 minute ago, phoenix66 said:

Another wrinkle to this ..are we really thinking we're not on his 10 team list ? 

Dunno .I'd take it if it meant the #7 and no retention on Marky but I just see it being an albatross ..  saving grace is it's a no trade not an NMC so could always bury him in the A if he's the second coming of year #2 Hiller

 

At times he has looked good, but then again so has our 2 and 3 goalies.  We are going to pay long term $4 for that?  Saving a bit less than $3M is not really a saving grace.  Ask EDM.  I will say this.  If they have scouted Korpi and feel that he has the tools to be a top goalie for the next 5 years, then okay.  Live with it, if it turns out to be a big mistake.  I doubt we have scouted him that hard.

[phoenix66]

Just now, travel_dude said:

 

At times he has looked good, but then again so has our 2 and 3 goalies.  We are going to pay long term $4 for that?  Saving a bit less than $3M is not really a saving grace.  Ask EDM.  I will say this.  If they have scouted Korpi and feel that he has the tools to be a top goalie for the next 5 years, then okay.  Live with it, if it turns out to be a big mistake.  I doubt we have scouted him that hard.

For sure ..and let's be clear ..if in this scenario we take him back.. it's not because we want him..it's because he's the bad contract we had to accept to get the deal done. If he ends up being serviceable again, it's a double win.. 

[tmac70]

42 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

💯... That is why I say expect a Talbot like signing if we trade Marky.. expect a short deal for some older centers like a Marchesshault or Stephenson .. definitely some solid D ..Forborts.. etc..

Placeholders in our areas of need to teach the kids ..keep the winning mentality.

Players like Killington benefit from the Tanevs of the world .. we see what Kadri has done for Zary (and vice versa ) 

 

As much as some want it ..and as much a we are committed to getting the kids playing..we will not play the tank game .. goal from day one of each season is playoffs..that's just the directive of this team..

I agree, it's reckless and irresponsible IMHO to trade away a solid goalie and toss a virtual rookie to no pun intended the Wolves. If you want to create a winning culture, then start by trying to win. Trevling for me was good at some things but horrific in asset management. He tossed 1st around like candy trying to force the outcome recklessly.  There is no reason we can get some very good UFA's on a short term 3-4 year window and have a somewhat competitive team, but still allow the prospects more time to mature and build confidence and compete. IMHO where we got into trouble with Benny, Monhan, JG, Chucky is at too young of an age they were toss on the roster but were also the best players. This time around new players coming in are surrounded by better veterans and have not as much pressure. 

 

For example, Wolf is being moved out but has had a gradual taste of the pro side of this, as has Corronato, Zary, Popisil, and a few others. My fear with Wolf is the current D man outside of Weegar and Anderson don't even make a good AHL roster make up. Trading Mags won't be a huge disadvantage as I think Corronato will and should fill the void. Grad a D man like Edmunson for example, shut down guy gritting, physical we don't have that now. I am also in favour of Jennott out of Tampa at the right value. Lets not forget the most effective and loved player from last season was and is Pospisil. 

[tmac70]

59 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

I agree! Conroy has been vigilant in getting players that can be serviceable or good in deals. So the bet is that he does the same, plus signs a few guys to try and be competitive. I doubt the team will be drafting in the top 5 next year. 

Exactly!!! If you want to build a winning culture or business you don't do it by being losers and tossing in the towel. This has to be calculated correctly, I think this is why there is so much energy around trying to get another pick inside the top 10. Forwards I prefer Lindstrom, Ignila or Catton, D would love Brium or Dickinson, or even Yamenchuk. I think Parekh is a huge gamble for anyone and its hit in one area only. Iggy and Dickenson would be HUGE wins for this club in the next 3-4 years. If done correctly I could see us being competitive for the next 2 years with a trending to contender in 27-28 season. 

[The_People1]

2 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

I agree, it's reckless and irresponsible IMHO to trade away a solid goalie and toss a virtual rookie to no pun intended the Wolves. If you want to create a winning culture, then start by trying to win. Trevling for me was good at some things but horrific in asset management. He tossed 1st around like candy trying to force the outcome recklessly.  There is no reason we can get some very good UFA's on a short term 3-4 year window and have a somewhat competitive team, but still allow the prospects more time to mature and build confidence and compete. IMHO where we got into trouble with Benny, Monhan, JG, Chucky is at too young of an age they were toss on the roster but were also the best players. This time around new players coming in are surrounded by better veterans and have not as much pressure. 

 

For example, Wolf is being moved out but has had a gradual taste of the pro side of this, as has Corronato, Zary, Popisil, and a few others. My fear with Wolf is the current D man outside of Weegar and Anderson don't even make a good AHL roster make up. Trading Mags won't be a huge disadvantage as I think Corronato will and should fill the void. Grad a D man like Edmunson for example, shut down guy gritting, physical we don't have that now. I am also in favour of Jennott out of Tampa at the right value. Lets not forget the most effective and loved player from last season was and is Pospisil. 

 

The real problem is a lack of long term planning and vision.  In an ideal world, all the pieces peak together at the same time.  We want our core + supporting cast to be cheap, young, and yet hitting their strides together.  Instead, Pospisil and Wolf are peaking while the rest of the roster is aging and in need of a total reset.  Our new core hasn't even been drafted yet and won't be completed until maybe 2027-29.

 

I know a lot of this was caused by Gaudreau and Tkachuk leaving so the Flames had their hands tied.  They had a rebuild option in a Tkachuk trade but opted for the win-now.  This was John Bean's own words.

 

Instead, yes as you say, the team won't be competitive for the next 4 years but Wolf needs support or else risk having his development ruined.

[The_People1]

6 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

Exactly!!! If you want to build a winning culture or business you don't do it by being losers and tossing in the towel. This has to be calculated correctly, I think this is why there is so much energy around trying to get another pick inside the top 10. Forwards I prefer Lindstrom, Ignila or Catton, D would love Brium or Dickinson, or even Yamenchuk. I think Parekh is a huge gamble for anyone and its hit in one area only. Iggy and Dickenson would be HUGE wins for this club in the next 3-4 years. If done correctly I could see us being competitive for the next 2 years with a trending to contender in 27-28 season. 

 

I'm not following here.  Are you saying you can't win a Cup if you start with a tanking culture in the beginning?  Too many examples to refute this, if not, outright suggest that most Cup winners begin with a tank at some point.

[robrob74]

28 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

Exactly!!! If you want to build a winning culture or business you don't do it by being losers and tossing in the towel. This has to be calculated correctly, I think this is why there is so much energy around trying to get another pick inside the top 10. Forwards I prefer Lindstrom, Ignila or Catton, D would love Brium or Dickinson, or even Yamenchuk. I think Parekh is a huge gamble for anyone and its hit in one area only. Iggy and Dickenson would be HUGE wins for this club in the next 3-4 years. If done correctly I could see us being competitive for the next 2 years with a trending to contender in 27-28 season. 

 

I get what you are saying, but I wonder how many teams that win the cup have a top 3 pick on their roster? It has become higher odds of winning a cup with a pick in the top of the draft... 

 

Problems aren't around building a culture of losing, it's in drafting beyond the first round. One could argue if we tanked we'd be fine because we've been a decent drafting team in the last bunch of years. Some have argued we've been drafting well. 

 

I don't have the worries most do that we'd be Buffalo or Edmonton, or Arizona... Etc. For every one of those teams there's Chicago, Tampa, Dallas. Granted Dallas didn't win a cup, but they've reached perennial contender status. Can't think of other Cup winning teams at the moment... Chances are, they had a top pick... LA and Boston are rare.

[sak22]

36 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

I get what you are saying, but I wonder how many teams that win the cup have a top 3 pick on their roster? It has become higher odds of winning a cup with a pick in the top of the draft... 

 

Problems aren't around building a culture of losing, it's in drafting beyond the first round. One could argue if we tanked we'd be fine because we've been a decent drafting team in the last bunch of years. Some have argued we've been drafting well. 

 

I don't have the worries most do that we'd be Buffalo or Edmonton, or Arizona... Etc. For every one of those teams there's Chicago, Tampa, Dallas. Granted Dallas didn't win a cup, but they've reached perennial contender status. Can't think of other Cup winning teams at the moment... Chances are, they had a top pick... LA and Boston are rare.

Hard to clump a team in the finals and one that has had playoff success the last few years with the other 2, as much as I hate to give them credit, they are a caution right now because of how much of their window might have been wasted.  But we do have to acknowledge the risk of being a Buffalo, or Arizona, just like we shouldn't have expectations of being the next Colorado or Tampa.  Florida is another example of why I hate the whole just tank for a few years and get back, because Huberdeau, Barkov and Ekblad all "peaked together" and they still accomplished nothing.  They brought in Q to coach and went dumpster diving and struck gold with the likes of Verhaeghe, Bennett, Forsling, Marchment and Duclair,  thats a tough model to follow, just like winning lotteries like Edmonton and New Jersey and finding gems later in the draft like Tampa.  A losing culture and inept management are key to getting to the bottom, but the organization needs to do the best it can to purge the inept management once you add the talent to end that.

[tmac70]

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I think the idea is you try out the new tandem of goalie and see where you are.  The current situation will not allow that to happen.  Seeing as the current version of the Flames was not really any better with or without Markstrom in nets, I don't think trading him would be a rebuild.  He is not a long term answer so if you get only a year out of Wold/Vladar before you need to upgrade, it's really not that much different.

Which is fine, but I don't care who we have in net, with the D pairings currently its a diaster waiting to happen for any goalie. You have to have some resemblance of defensive players to assist in preventing scoring.  I am not for a rebuild, and can with certainty come to terms  it won't happen. Forever every Tampa, Col  you have a Buff, Ott, ANA, EDM, SJ... regardless of the direction this franchise goes it has to be very calculated in the process 

[tmac70]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

I'm not following here.  Are you saying you can't win a Cup if you start with a tanking culture in the beginning?  Too many examples to refute this, if not, outright suggest that most Cup winners begin with a tank at some point.

Nope what I am trying to articulate is the franchise will never do it. I don't disagree that it hasn't been done, but you can also find data to validate that it is the only way. If FLA wins the cup most of the roster was built on trades, If EDM wins( and i pary they don't) than you have the tank side agenda. Evidance can be presented to affirm both sides. I hear what your saying and I don't disagree with the logic behind it. If i was the owner I defenity wouldn't allow a full blown tank job, this market isn't EDM where your going to get the support regardless 

[The_People1]

Just now, tmac70 said:

Nope what I am trying to articulate is the franchise will never do it. I don't disagree that it hasn't been done, but you can also find data to validate that it is the only way. If FLA wins the cup most of the roster was built on trades, If EDM wins( and i pary they don't) than you have the tank side agenda. Evidance can be presented to affirm both sides. I hear what your saying and I don't disagree with the logic behind it. If i was the owner I defenity wouldn't allow a full blown tank job, this market isn't EDM where your going to get the support regardless 

 

I don't want to turn this into a "tank" discussion cause we do that every year for eternity.

 

However, you bring up a good discussion and that's "Wolf's Development vs Tank up the draft ranks to pick a franchise altering talent".

 

Obviously, leaving Wolf out to dry every night for the next 4 years will cause repairable damage to his development.  We would basically ruin a prospect before he even has a chance.  If we draft franchise altering talent and in 4 years, don't have a franchise G, then basically the rebuild has failed and we are OTT, BUF, and NJD.  Those three teams have the major skater pieces in place but don't have a legit starter.  BUF might have but still young.

 

Yet, the other side of the argument is, where is the new core right now?  If we go to UFA and "buy" help to keep the Flames competitive, then we may never draft a franchise C and D.  We will bounce back from this season with a G and nothing much else.  We "should" tank hard for two years minimum first before even trying to be competitive again.

[tmac70]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

 

I get what you are saying, but I wonder how many teams that win the cup have a top 3 pick on their roster? It has become higher odds of winning a cup with a pick in the top of the draft... 

 

Problems aren't around building a culture of losing, it's in drafting beyond the first round. One could argue if we tanked we'd be fine because we've been a decent drafting team in the last bunch of years. Some have argued we've been drafting well. 

 

I don't have the worries most do that we'd be Buffalo or Edmonton, or Arizona... Etc. For every one of those teams there's Chicago, Tampa, Dallas. Granted Dallas didn't win a cup, but they've reached perennial contender status. Can't think of other Cup winning teams at the moment... Chances are, they had a top pick... LA and Boston are rare.

FLA if they win drafted Barkov.... but they also have our previous #4 and #6 via trade. We have had top picks, in the past 10 years they all play for different teams now. We also had a exceptional talent in JG 4th rounder. IMHO we have had great players in this organization in the past decade but the wrong individual building it. Thats why I think this draft is important for the Flames, this is your rebuild opportunity. If you can land another top 10 pick, than its up to the scouts to hit it out of the park. If you read between the lines, the Dallas model is where and what I think this organization does

[tmac70]

11 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

I don't want to turn this into a "tank" discussion cause we do that every year for eternity.

 

However, you bring up a good discussion and that's "Wolf's Development vs Tank up the draft ranks to pick a franchise altering talent".

 

Obviously, leaving Wolf out to dry every night for the next 4 years will cause repairable damage to his development.  We would basically ruin a prospect before he even has a chance.  If we draft franchise altering talent and in 4 years, don't have a franchise G, then basically the rebuild has failed and we are OTT, BUF, and NJD.  Those three teams have the major skater pieces in place but don't have a legit starter.  BUF might have but still young.

 

Yet, the other side of the argument is, where is the new core right now?  If we go to UFA and "buy" help to keep the Flames competitive, then we may never draft a franchise C and D.  We will bounce back from this season with a G and nothing much else.  We "should" tank hard for two years minimum first before even trying to be competitive again.

The damage with losing transends to everyone. Tell me who is excited to out of pocket hundreds and thousands of dollars to watch a crap team play, or even wanted to watch anyone lose. How do you know won't get a great C or D in the current draft picks we have coming in the next 3 years. For every high draft pick that's won a cup there are 3 that have done nothing. I agree with what your saying just can't see nor do I belive it should happen. I would rather have a 20-21 year old come on to a roster with confidence and a good supporting cast than a green 18 year old and toss all the burden on them to be the saviour of the future. 

[Otown72]

One little concern for this team from both a fan perspective and management going forward has to do with next year's  draft and one of Calgary first round picks. My understanding is that it's top ten protected deferring the first rnd pick to the FLA one? Meaning Calgary either has to be bad next year or make the playoffs 🤔 😅

 

My guess is that they will sign and trade to try and make the playoffs only prolonging the rebuild by losing the '13th' (or something like) overall pick next year😔

 

I think being bad for one year is in the team's best interest?

 

Chicago did it,, why not Cgy?🙂

 

Doubt ownership would be on board 😆

 

 

[robrob74]

59 minutes ago, sak22 said:

Hard to clump a team in the finals and one that has had playoff success the last few years with the other 2, as much as I hate to give them credit, they are a caution right now because of how much of their window might have been wasted.  But we do have to acknowledge the risk of being a Buffalo, or Arizona, just like we shouldn't have expectations of being the next Colorado or Tampa.  Florida is another example of why I hate the whole just tank for a few years and get back, because Huberdeau, Barkov and Ekblad all "peaked together" and they still accomplished nothing.  They brought in Q to coach and went dumpster diving and struck gold with the likes of Verhaeghe, Bennett, Forsling, Marchment and Duclair,  thats a tough model to follow, just like winning lotteries like Edmonton and New Jersey and finding gems later in the draft like Tampa.  A losing culture and inept management are key to getting to the bottom, but the organization needs to do the best it can to purge the inept management once you add the talent to end that.

 

 

I don't think so, as I think it's just we are already there if that's the case. We have so many holes, and the only thing we don't have are elite players that you get deep in the draft. We are already a bottom 10 team and can be stuck there as the guys are aging out, and it's not like we have a deep prospect pool yet. So, we could be them anyway.