redfire11 Posted February 29 Report Share Posted February 29 1 of 3 retention spots used. Nothing WOW about the trade until we see what we have in the Russian defender. The trade had to be done and the return was as expected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted February 29 Author Report Share Posted February 29 2 minutes ago, phoenix66 said: We traded a pending UFA instead of losing him for nothing..that's called asset management... Trading Anderson for picks .. that would be tanking Doesn't matter how you skin the cat, once you trade a top D, you are tanking. Any chance they had to make the playoffs, no matter how slim, are done. I have been pushing to trade him and Hanifin, because we have to move on. But I recognize the fact that the season is now done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted February 29 Author Report Share Posted February 29 Just now, redfire11 said: 1 of 3 retention spots used. Nothing WOW about the trade until we see what we have in the Russian defender. The trade had to be done and the return was as expected. You mean for NJ, we didn't use a retention spot per se. Unless there is some weird rule about a team that trades to a 3rd team that retains costs us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MP5029 Posted February 29 Report Share Posted February 29 Anyone thinking that the Tanev deal was holding up moving the likes of Hanifin and or even possibly Markstrom? I hope they don’t move Markstrom till after the Kipper game…I think that would be a class act to let Marky play for the kipper game, I think he was a guy Marky followed as a kid so that would be a special deal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfire11 Posted February 29 Report Share Posted February 29 Just now, travel_dude said: You mean for NJ, we didn't use a retention spot per se. Unless there is some weird rule about a team that trades to a 3rd team that retains costs us. We retained 50% to NJD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted February 29 Author Report Share Posted February 29 3 minutes ago, redfire11 said: 1 of 3 retention spots used. Nothing WOW about the trade until we see what we have in the Russian defender. The trade had to be done and the return was as expected. I missed the part where we retained 50%. My bad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfire11 Posted February 29 Report Share Posted February 29 Just now, travel_dude said: I missed the part where we retained 50%. My bad Dallas got one hell of a defenseman for 1,25M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob74 Posted February 29 Report Share Posted February 29 3 minutes ago, redfire11 said: We retained 50% to NJD and Jersey retained the remaining possible retention of 50% of that Tanev contract, which = 25% of the Tanev contract to get a 4th... they explained it was because they have a ton of LTIR space they might as well get something for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted February 29 Author Report Share Posted February 29 Just now, redfire11 said: Dallas got one hell of a defenseman for 1,25M So, in some ways we got the conditional for retaining salary for Jersey. It doesn't (and can't) show that way. NJ got very little, where they sent Brady for a 4th and retained 25%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted February 29 Author Report Share Posted February 29 2 minutes ago, robrob74 said: and Jersey retained the remaining possible retention of 50% of that Tanev contract, which = 25% of the Tanev contract to get a 4th... they explained it was because they have a ton of LTIR space they might as well get something for it. 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfire11 Posted February 29 Report Share Posted February 29 I think Dallas is going to make another move. Hence needing NJ to retain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted February 29 Author Report Share Posted February 29 Just now, redfire11 said: I think Dallas is going to make another move. Hence needing NJ to retain. If they want to complete the tandum, send us Stanky and a 1st. Or 1st + Dilandrea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted February 29 Author Report Share Posted February 29 What was the rumoured return for both Hanifinan and Tanev? Dellandrea, Faska, 1st and something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfire11 Posted February 29 Report Share Posted February 29 Dallas can now afford Hannifin Hannifin 50% retained = 2.475 M For Dellandrea 900K 2024 1st Dallas has 2.05 m cap space 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob74 Posted February 29 Report Share Posted February 29 10 minutes 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. I think they can still circle back to him... maybe being out of the Playoff hunt they changed directions and now could be willing to. it sounds like Fitzgerald has a good relationship with Conroy. but maybe they might think, "k! We were a goalie away from contending and need one for the next few years." They can get Marky for the next few years as a placeholder and a guy to help them contend until a younger goalie comes up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted February 29 Author Report Share Posted February 29 5 minutes ago, robrob74 said: I think they can still circle back to him... maybe being out of the Playoff hunt they changed directions and now could be willing to. it sounds like Fitzgerald has a good relationship with Conroy. but maybe they might think, "k! We were a goalie away from contending and need one for the next few years." They can get Marky for the next few years as a placeholder and a guy to help them contend until a younger goalie comes up. I mean they traded a young un-signed goalie prospect to DAL, through us. So they traded 1.125M retained plus the prospect for a DAL 4th. I don't know what that says. They are as in the hunt for the playoffs as we were, minus a goalie. They are close to 3rd in the division and 2nd WC spot - 5 back. We are 5 back of WC2, but 7 back of 3rd. I wouldn't call that out of the hunt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted February 29 Report Share Posted February 29 30 minutes ago, travel_dude said: Doesn't matter how you skin the cat, once you trade a top D, you are tanking. Any chance they had to make the playoffs, no matter how slim, are done. I have been pushing to trade him and Hanifin, because we have to move on. But I recognize the fact that the season is now done. Tanking is deliberately setting your team up to fail.. yes it hurts us in the standings ..but it was not the intent to hurt the team .. that's not tanking .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
420since1974 Posted February 29 Report Share Posted February 29 I'm fine with this trade. You have to get something/anything for pending UFAs. No more Gaudreaus for nothing. Hanifin is up next, then I think the Flames are done for the season. I feel that Calgary will keep Markstrom until at least early summer. Time to scout hard on the players likely to be available between the 8th - 12th picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted February 29 Report Share Posted February 29 46 minutes ago, robrob74 said: and Jersey retained the remaining possible retention of 50% of that Tanev contract, which = 25% of the Tanev contract to get a 4th... they explained it was because they have a ton of LTIR space they might as well get something for it. Then why did they insist the Flames retain on Markstrom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickross Posted February 29 Report Share Posted February 29 1 hour ago, travel_dude said: Markstrom without Tanev. Reminds me of the 2nd round of the playoffs. If you trade your best defensive defenseman, are you not tanking? This trade has more to do with asset management than tanking, if we flip Markstrom as well than indeed it’s a tank job but I believe the organization still believes playoffs are attainable this year. I do think the Flames are better defensively under Huska’s zone system so hopefully losing Tanev doesn’t disrupt that too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfire11 Posted February 29 Report Share Posted February 29 CGY Harley, Thomas Blümel, Matej Dallas Hannifin 50% retained 2 young excellent defense prospects Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted February 29 Report Share Posted February 29 1 minute ago, redfire11 said: CGY Harley, Thomas Blümel, Matej Dallas Hannifin 50% retained 2 young excellent defense prospects Doubtful DAL would do the Tanev deal without trying to get Hanifin at the same time. I think Hanifin is going elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thebrewcrew Posted February 29 Report Share Posted February 29 Thomas Harley you can argue is as good as Hanifin and has team control. While it would be fantastic, I don’t think it’s realistic. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob74 Posted February 29 Report Share Posted February 29 9 minutes ago, The_People1 said: Then why did they insist the Flames retain on Markstrom? I dunno, maybe the amount that is retained was more than what they Flames were willing to, and we gotta remember, the retention wouldn't be just this season, it would be on the two more, therefore the Flames retaining on Marky's contract would enable more cap flex when all these LTIR back off the Injured Reserves for Jersey next year... This isn't just this season, whereas Tanev's retention is only this year. that's a huge difference Jersey will need the cap money the next two years whereas they don't this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted February 29 Author Report Share Posted February 29 4 minutes ago, robrob74 said: I dunno, maybe the amount that is retained was more than what they Flames were willing to, and we gotta remember, the retention wouldn't be just this season, it would be on the two more, therefore the Flames retaining on Marky's contract would enable more cap flex when all these LTIR back off the Injured Reserves for Jersey next year... This isn't just this season, whereas Tanev's retention is only this year. that's a huge difference Jersey will need the cap money the next two years whereas they don't this season. So, next year they have to re-sign Toffoli and do something with Mercer. He has no leverage and can get a bridge deal. They have Foote and McLeod who won't be playing for them again. Two young goalies with little experience as RFA and RFA with arbitration. Neither is costing much. I say all of this because they have $19M available to make those moves. They lose a couple of UFA D-men that were getting up there in age. Nothing really crazy to replace in $$. Not with Dougie back. They could take Markstrom on without making any sacrifices. Just means they have to delay the big 2nd contract for Mercer. And not pay Toffoli $8M. 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