Jump to content

Realistic (and unrealistic) Trades - 2024 Edition


travel_dude

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

There's the rub..  people can love it ..hate it..debate it ..etc.. but the goal is playoffs every year ..they may understand there may be pains getting there .. but the goal from the organization is playoffs ..that much has not changed on the process ..  the statements from Conroy and the actions to date make that pretty obvious ...

Not signing or asking to leave are the only reasons they are making or have made the moves they are 

 

And that's fine.  The organization can say whatever.  I think fans should want the goal of the organization to be contending for the Cup, not merely making the playoffs.  These two are not the same.

 

Making the playoffs means being better than 50% of the league.  Contending for the Cup takes much more planning and execution.  And excuse us who suggest the Flames have long term plans at the expense of short term gains.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

I believe Toffoli asked to talk extension but when the enthusiasm wasn't reciprocated, then he asked for a trade.  So in the end, Toffoli wanted out.

yes this is correct, he asked for a trade 

 

19 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Toffoli was not a "not signing" trade.  He had a certain expectation and was signed for this year.  He did not ask to be traded.  From a cap view alone, his future deal did not fit with the aims of the team.  This also flies in the face of making the playoffs every year.  

 

The GM (and to a certain extent the owners) evaluate what kind of team they have.  Half a year of team struggles does not suggest you have a team that will make the playoffs.  Sometimes a GM will address the fans and tell them they are rebuilding, but most times it's just through actions.  Announcing means fire sale and low prices.  

 

But anyway, who really cares what they say out loud.  His actions will speak. 

He did ask for a trade 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

And that's fine.  The organization can say whatever.  I think fans should want the goal of the organization to be contending for the Cup, not merely making the playoffs.  These two are not the same.

 

Making the playoffs means being better than 50% of the league.  Contending for the Cup takes much more planning and execution.  And excuse us who suggest the Flames have long term plans at the expense of short term gains.

I'm not saying you're wrong for wanting that, that is what these boards are for .. I'm just saying what appears the team has chosen as a path .. regardless of what we all think 

 

if Lindholm had signed his offer .. he'd be here for 8 more years .. if Hanifin had signed his , he wouldn't be on the block .. the teams intent and preference was to lock them both up.. these moves are essentially forced, not team decision .. that says to me No tear down .. no losing or being bad on purpose.. thats all I'm saying 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

I'm not saying you're wrong for wanting that, that is what these boards are for .. I'm just saying what appears the team has chosen as a path .. regardless of what we all think 

 

if Lindholm had signed his offer .. he'd be here for 8 more years .. if Hanifin had signed his , he wouldn't be on the block .. the teams intent and preference was to lock them both up.. these moves are essentially forced, not team decision .. that says to me No tear down .. no losing or being bad on purpose.. thats all I'm saying 

 

Yes the team had "in the past" chosen the path as you've put it.   However, Conroy also spoke about getting younger when he first took over GM.  We saw the Toffoli for Sharongovich move.  We saw Lindholm for picks and prospects (Kuzmenko as an experiment).  And we are about to see Hanifin and Tanev for picks and prospects.

 

I mean, even if they don't trade Markstrom, this has been a tear down.  We simply don't have it in us to be a playoff team next year.  We don't have the D.  It's going to be a long year.

 

Keeping Markstrom is simply bad asset management because moving him now is selling high.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the play here by Conroy. 
 

it’s been widely reported that Tanev had a lot more interested teams than Hanifin. Well, Tanev is gone now. And the Stars got even stronger in the western conference. All those teams that missed out on Tanev now only have Hanifin as an option. 
 

well played. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LouCifer said:

I like the play here by Conroy. 
 

it’s been widely reported that Tanev had a lot more interested teams than Hanifin. Well, Tanev is gone now. And the Stars got even stronger in the western conference. All those teams that missed out on Tanev now only have Hanifin as an option. 
 

well played. 


good to have one chip fall and just means maybe an step toward a Hanifin deal? I get they're different players but those that want a D, Hanifin might be the next on the list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, robrob74 said:


oops. They get a 4th rounder for retaining? 

 

Ya NJD is the loser here.  They even send Brady Cole (former 5th round pick) to get back a 4th round pick.  And retain $1.1-mil.

 

Wasn't the Markstrom deal dead because NJD wanted the Flames to retain?  They turn around and retain salary to facilitate someone else's trade.  Feels like NJD throwing in the towel for this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The_People1 said:

 

Ya NJD is the loser here.  They even send Brady Cole (former 5th round pick) to get back a 4th round pick.  And retain $1.1-mil.

Wasn't the Markstrom deal dead because NJD wanted the Flames to retain?  They turn around and retain salary to facilitate someone else's trade.  Feels like NJD throwing in the towel for this season.

Thought the exact same thing. Seravalli is a tool. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The_People1 said:

 

Sounds like a stay-at-home D.  6'2" LHS LD.  Don't we already have that in Solovyov and Kuznetsov?  Feels like an unnecessary add.

 

Maybe, but its also an extra asset.

I'm curious of the conditions on the 3rd rounder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The_People1 said:

 

Sounds like a stay-at-home D.  6'2" LHS LD.  Don't we already have that in Solovyov and Kuznetsov?  Feels like an unnecessary add.


Im thinking more along the lines that this “package” had the better combination of assets compared to other offers. Also, seeing the value Tanev brings to our D corps, and knowing Hanifin is also on the way out, acquiring a Dman with that skill set could prove valuable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Sounds like a stay-at-home D.  6'2" LHS LD.  Don't we already have that in Solovyov and Kuznetsov?  Feels like an unnecessary add.


I dunno, I think it's good to have more of that kind of D in case Kuz or Sol don't make it.

 

better to have more bullets in the barrel and hope none are duds. When the time comes, they're traceable if we are doing the proper homework.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Sounds like a stay-at-home D.  6'2" LHS LD.  Don't we already have that in Solovyov and Kuznetsov?  Feels like an unnecessary add.

 

So, we weren't deep in our D prospects, where Solo and Kuz were the only stay at home types we had in the pipeline.  This guy is a plus player in 45 AHL games.  They claim they have scouted him.  A 2nd plus a prospect plus another pick is about what we would have expected I guess.  No retention and all NJ got was a different pick.  We get back $4.5M of cap in the deal.  Less if he plays right away.  

 

I wasn't sure why people expected a bigger return for Tanev than Hanifin.  Maybe we get worse for him, maybe a lot better.  We didn't lose him for nothing.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, travel_dude said:

I don't like getting nothing if Dallas doesn't go to the cup, but whatever.  

It's a 3rd 2 years from now.

Yeah, I thought the condition might have been a re-signing or at least a semifinal appearance.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...