Realistic (and unrealistic) Trades - 2024 Edition

[Thebrewcrew]

16 minutes ago, MP5029 said:

Ok so was doing a little looking around and noticed there are a lot of teams without a first rounder this year:

 

WPG

TBL

PIT

Edm

VCR

FLA

BOS

 

I’m kinda wondering if Conroy could leverage the 28th pick for a top prospect nearly NHL ready from any of these teams? Do any of these teams have anyone worth trading the 28th for?

 

I wish Col didn’t have a pick this year, could have leveraged the 28th for a package to land Ritchie..if at all possible Ritchie is definitely a guy Conroy should be going hard after.

 

anyway, back to reality, anyone have any thoughts on possible targets with the teams

listed above that would be worth moving the 28th pick for? Clearly Ctr and D are going to be the top targets.

A lot of these teams you listed are very, very thin in prospects. 
 

The obvious team to call would be Winnipeg. Could you get McGroarty from Winnipeg? I doubt it for the 28th pick. But worth a call. Then you have to factor in, can you sign him if you’re the Flames? Really good prospect though.

[robrob74]

34 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

A lot of these teams you listed are very, very thin in prospects. 
 

The obvious team to call would be Winnipeg. Could you get McGroarty from Winnipeg? I doubt it for the 28th pick. But worth a call. Then you have to factor in, can you sign him if you’re the Flames? Really good prospect though.

what about Mangiapane with 25% retained and the #28? Or something like that? 
 

one thing about some of those teams, I think Pittsburgh would wanna keep trying to win as long as Crosby is playing, same with Tampa, we'll all those teams. Good thinking to try get a player closer to being ready. 
 

id look more to teams that might need to get an NHL player who blocks signings and try get a depth pick as a sweetener. I don't care if they block a prospect, as long as the prospect is waiver exempt that is. Get a second rounder for a guy that can play, but a team needs to get rid of to gain more assets. 

[MP5029]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

what about Mangiapane with 25% retained and the #28? Or something like that? 
 

one thing about some of those teams, I think Pittsburgh would wanna keep trying to win as long as Crosby is playing, same with Tampa, we'll all those teams. Good thinking to try get a player closer to being ready. 
 

id look more to teams that might need to get an NHL player who blocks signings and try get a depth pick as a sweetener. I don't care if they block a prospect, as long as the prospect is waiver exempt that is. Get a second rounder for a guy that can play, but a team needs to get rid of to gain more assets. 

Maybe O.Pickering from Pits? He’s a LD but I remember him from 2022 draft as a potentially great pick?

 

there are a few others in WPG other than  McG to consider too..

 

outside of that I couldn’t find much 

[travel_dude]

8 hours ago, JTech780 said:

That’s a prospect that I would be calling about if I was Calgary. The worrying part is that the Jets are probably looking to move him because he doesn’t want to sign.

 

I would be calling about him just because of the name.  Really the description of him sounds interesting.  Bull.  Cutbacks.  He's from Nebraska, a state full of farms.  Hmmm, sounds familiar.  I wasn't sure, but is he dual citizenship?

[phoenix66]

10 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I would be calling about him just because of the name.  Really the description of him sounds interesting.  Bull.  Cutbacks.  He's from Nebraska, a state full of farms.  Hmmm, sounds familiar.  I wasn't sure, but is he dual citizenship?

💯 Would check on him.  Just if signing was the issue , with our history I wouldn't make a move unless we knew he'd sign 

[tmac70]

56 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

💯 Would check on him.  Just if signing was the issue , with our history I wouldn't make a move unless we knew he'd sign 

Speculation is that it's not a city issue but a difference of opinion on development. It appears the Jets want him in the AHL and he wants a spot on the club. IMHO the NCAA college rules need to change. It provides too much entitlement to the players. BPA at the draft for some clubs becomes a larger gamble in drafting NCAA players. The simple solution is if a team's selection doesn't wish to sign or play for a club you're ineligible to play in the NHL for 7 years.  Signs and trades should be encouraged as at least it allows the team to require something back in return, this entitlement issue with a long ban, Go play in Russia or the Swiss league. 

[phoenix66]

9 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

Speculation is that it's not a city issue but a difference of opinion on development. It appears the Jets want him in the AHL and he wants a spot on the club. IMHO the NCAA college rules need to change. It provides too much entitlement to the players. BPA at the draft for some clubs becomes a larger gamble in drafting NCAA players. The simple solution is if a team's selection doesn't wish to sign or play for a club you're ineligible to play in the NHL for 7 years.  Signs and trades should be encouraged as at least it allows the team to require something back in return, this entitlement issue with a long ban, Go play in Russia or the Swiss league. 

I feel it's a very easy solution.

Junior players when they are drafted are eligible to play in the NHL and sign an entry contract immediately..so it makes sense there is a 2 year window to do so or the team forefeits the player ..

College kids can't sign until they leave school .. therefore the 2 year window should begin when they leave school. 

It bebefits the player as they can elect to finish their school with no pressure .. and the teams as they can still have rights to the asset. Some will say that's too much power to the teams , but the teams put a lot into those players. Look at fox..he attended prospect camps .had access to flames trainers , and coaching ..only to walk. 

Just like I'd like to see compensatory picks brought back for losing UFA tied to the deals they sign .. bigger player ..higher picks 

[phoenix66]

1 minute ago, phoenix66 said:

I feel it's a very easy solution.

Junior players when they are drafted are eligible to play in the NHL and sign an entry contract immediately..so it makes sense there is a 2 year window to do so or the team forefeits the player ..

College kids can't sign until they leave school .. therefore the 2 year window should begin when they leave school IF an offer is made by the team . No offer , fine , UFA.. offer gets made , it triggers the 2 year window and makes them RFA

It benefits the player as they can elect to finish their school with no pressure .. and the teams as they can still have rights to the asset. Some will say that's too much power to the teams , but the teams put a lot into those players. Look at fox..he attended prospect camps .had access to flames trainers , and coaching ..only to walk. 

Just like I'd like to see compensatory picks brought back for losing UFA tied to the deals they sign .. bigger player ..higher picks 

 

[The_People1]

52 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

Speculation is that it's not a city issue but a difference of opinion on development. It appears the Jets want him in the AHL and he wants a spot on the club. IMHO the NCAA college rules need to change. It provides too much entitlement to the players. BPA at the draft for some clubs becomes a larger gamble in drafting NCAA players. The simple solution is if a team's selection doesn't wish to sign or play for a club you're ineligible to play in the NHL for 7 years.  Signs and trades should be encouraged as at least it allows the team to require something back in return, this entitlement issue with a long ban, Go play in Russia or the Swiss league. 

 

Right now, teams have rights to a kid for 4 years after a draft.  This coincides perfectly with kids going to college route and then going UFA.  Could the NHL simply change the rule to give teams 5 years of rights instead?

[The_People1]

21 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

 

 

 

This is a great watch if you have the 30 min. Covers a lot of ground ..

Some quick highlights:

Markstrom was never asked to waive at the deadline .. a deal was never as close as reported,  and also " If any of the rumored deals were on the table he'd have done them in a heartbeat 

 

Other teams were in on Markstrom but all deals were similar and Bahl was the best player being included ..so NJ got it 

 

Vladar is not a guarantee to be ready for the season ..so a vet signing is very possible 

 

He sees a big opportunity at pick movement at this draft ..moreso than other years .. suggests a strong possibility of moving up from 28 

 

Both sides want Kyllington to be on the team..just a matter of the usual term and $ being discussed 

 

Kuzmenko and yegor have both expressed interest in staying in Calgary ..but obviously can't have actual contract discussion until July 1 

 

He's not keen on 7 year deals on July 1, but more than open to overpays on 2-4 yr deals .. players who can help the team as well as "grow the culture " 

 

Just because a player wants to play a position , they'll play where they play the best.. Huska is more than open to seeing what he has but in the end it will be where they play the best.  References his own st Louis experience where Quenneville told him he  can be a 3rd line checker on the blues or go play center on the top line in the AHL 

 

It's a good interview.

 

On the draft, Conroy talked like he has a bias for Centers saying because he played as a Center... But then also mentioned "if there's a run on D early"... Sort of suggested to me they want a D at 9 but won't hesitate to pick a Center if D's are all gone.

 

Conroy didn't want to really talk about Tij from what I can tell.  When asked if Tij could play Center, Conroy basically hinted 'no'.  It didn't feel like poker or anything.  His reaction tells us the Flames have a few D they'd like and if gone, then it's going to be a Center.

[Thebrewcrew]

7 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

It's a good interview.

 

On the draft, Conroy talked like he has a bias for Centers saying because he played as a Center... But then also mentioned "if there's a run on D early"... Sort of suggested to me they want a D at 9 but won't hesitate to pick a Center if D's are all gone.

 

Conroy didn't want to really talk about Tij from what I can tell.  When asked if Tij could play Center, Conroy basically hinted 'no'.  It didn't feel like poker or anything.  His reaction tells us the Flames have a few D they'd like and if gone, then it's going to be a Center.

Defence make sense for a lot of reasons

 

They take the longest to develop, generally. If this is year one of a rebuild, a defenceman should be finding himself as an NHLer by the time the team is ready to take a step in three or four seasons.

 

The blueline is a real issue, both at the NHL level and in the system. With the addition of Bahl, the Flames now have three NHL D. I like Poirier/Solovyov/Brzustewicz. How many will be top 4 NHLers? Maybe none. Flames haven't invested enough in the blueline, early in the draft.

 

Ideally though, I think they come out of the first round with at least one D. Either at 9th or 28th.

[phoenix66]

36 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

It's a good interview.

 

On the draft, Conroy talked like he has a bias for Centers saying because he played as a Center... But then also mentioned "if there's a run on D early"... Sort of suggested to me they want a D at 9 but won't hesitate to pick a Center if D's are all gone.

 

Conroy didn't want to really talk about Tij from what I can tell.  When asked if Tij could play Center, Conroy basically hinted 'no'.  It didn't feel like poker or anything.  His reaction tells us the Flames have a few D they'd like and if gone, then it's going to be a Center.

I heard that a different way.. ideally he'd like a center .a run on D early leaves him lots of choice and top options. Just the way he said if there's a big gap in skill that would push him back to Bpa 

[The_People1]

4 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

I heard that a different way.. ideally he'd like a center .a run on D early leaves him lots of choice and top options. Just the way he said if there's a big gap in skill that would push him back to Bpa 

 

Yes, he prefers a Center and that if there's a run on D early then that leaves him with more options... Which means if there's no run on D, then he would have no choice but to take a D.  Doesn't sound like he's taking a Center no matter what.

[robrob74]

4 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Right now, teams have rights to a kid for 4 years after a draft.  This coincides perfectly with kids going to college route and then going UFA.  Could the NHL simply change the rule to give teams 5 years of rights instead?

even 6 would be good, or make it a +2 after they leave school? Or maybe make it 3? Generally, once a jr is no longer eligible to play junior... 

 

they should just make it like RFA signing. A college player signs with another team, maybe they get their pick back, or the amount a signing is worth? I dunno, I said get their pick back because the ELC is going to be worth less than the possible  actual pick.

[Thebrewcrew]

It’s not playing in Winnipeg that’s the issue. It’s believed the issue is the Jets handling of young players.

[conundrumed]

Made-up scenario:

Vegas wants to keep Marchessault, has to move Theodore to fit him. Can't take $$ back.

Would you give them 28th +?

1yr at $5.2, 28yo. 5 team NT list.

Re-sign or recoup at tdl.

[cross16]

23 hours ago, tmac70 said:

Speculation is that it's not a city issue but a difference of opinion on development. It appears the Jets want him in the AHL and he wants a spot on the club. IMHO the NCAA college rules need to change. It provides too much entitlement to the players. BPA at the draft for some clubs becomes a larger gamble in drafting NCAA players. The simple solution is if a team's selection doesn't wish to sign or play for a club you're ineligible to play in the NHL for 7 years.  Signs and trades should be encouraged as at least it allows the team to require something back in return, this entitlement issue with a long ban, Go play in Russia or the Swiss league. 

 

 

Annual reminder that there are no "college rules" for drafted players.  4 years until you are UFA is the same for players drafted out of college and junior (and Europe for that matter).

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

 

Annual reminder that there are no "college rules" for drafted players.  4 years until you are UFA is the same for players drafted out of college and junior (and Europe for that matter).

 

Why do some kids go back into the draft?

[travel_dude]

20 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Yes, he prefers a Center and that if there's a run on D early then that leaves him with more options... Which means if there's no run on D, then he would have no choice but to take a D.  Doesn't sound like he's taking a Center no matter what.

 

I think you alluded to it, but they probably have their sites on a few D.  Not all the so-called top 10 D that some predict.  If it comes down to the Flames 3rd choice of 3 D available and the C's that they have, it comes down to BPA.  That's IMHO.  I think they do have a couple of OMG picks where they run up to the stage to call the name.  

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Made-up scenario:

Vegas wants to keep Marchessault, has to move Theodore to fit him. Can't take $$ back.

Would you give them 28th +?

1yr at $5.2, 28yo. 5 team NT list.

Re-sign or recoup at tdl.

 

Okay, so we are no obligated to honor his NTC after the trade.

Vegas is in a weird spot with the Lehner LTIR situation.

They could take advantage by holding off to sign a UFA like Marshmallow.

 

I might make a counter offer that gives then a bit more flexibility for a bit longer.

Andersson + prospect (Kuznetsov) for Theodore.

We balance out the D a bit more with LHS and RHS.

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Made-up scenario:

Vegas wants to keep Marchessault, has to move Theodore to fit him. Can't take $$ back.

Would you give them 28th +?

1yr at $5.2, 28yo. 5 team NT list.

Re-sign or recoup at tdl.

 

It's not the year to be doing something like this.  You want to draft 15th next year instead of 5?

[jefsmi]

How does our first we traded to MTL work next year? Is it protected?

 

[cross16]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

Why do some kids go back into the draft?

 

Teams get 2 year exclusive rights to players that they draft. So you have 2 years to sign then player before the have to go back into the draft. The exception to this rule are both NCAA and European players as obviously you cannot sign a player who is going to school without impacting their eligibility. 

 

to make a long story short everyone is a FA after 4 years of being selected. The difference for the NCAA vs major junior is the NCAA has a path where they can play the full 4 years where a player in major junior would have to get creative for 1 year before they were a UFA, but ultimately the rule is the same. 

 

Ultimately for me this is a debate in leverage and not rules. Funny how nationality comes up in this two and yet ignores the stories of Lindros, Lemieux and Byran Bedard. 

[cross16]

1 hour ago, jefsmi said:

How does our first we traded to MTL work next year? Is it protected?

 

 

This is probably the most simple I can make this. The short answer is yes the flames pick is protected (to a certain extent) but so if the Panthers pick they are sending to the flames

 

If the Flames finish bottom 10 and the Panthers are outside the bottom 10, MTL gets Florida's pick. 

If the Flames and Panthers both finish outside the bottom 10, MTL gets the better of the 2 picks. 

If the Panthers finish bottom 10 and the flames finish outside the top 10, MTL gets the Flames pick. 

If BOTH the Panthers and Flames finish in the bottom 10 then the Flames pick would go to the Habs unless it's first overall. In that scenario it reverts to a 2026 picks and would be given to MTL with no conditions. 

[travel_dude]

15 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

This is probably the most simple I can make this. The short answer is yes the flames pick is protected (to a certain extent) but so if the Panthers pick they are sending to the flames)

 

If the Flames finish bottom 10 and the Panthers are outside the bottom 10, MTL picks Florida's pick. 

If the Flames and Panthers both finish outside the bottom 10, MTL gets the better of the 2 picks. 

If the panthers finish bottom 10 and the flames finish outside the top 10, MTL gets the Flames pick. 

If BOTH the Panthers and Flames finish in the bottom 10 then the Flames pick would go to the Habs unless it's first overall. In that scenario it reverts to a 2026 picks and would be given to MTL with no conditions. 

 

You do a better job of explaining it that even Capfriendly does.  

I think the only thing missing is that we may not get the Panther's 2025 pick.

It's lotto protected and would slide to 2026.

I know he didn't ask, but it plays into it.