The_People1 Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 12 minutes ago, phoenix66 said: I would think it's the picks with no retention.. retention costs you more Markstrom straight up for #10? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 3 minutes ago, The_People1 said: Markstrom straight up for #10? Yep.. the Schneider trade sets a precedent for that . Yes I know Schneider was a bit younger but he was also semi unproven .. We can use the cap space to grab somebody like a Talbot to mentor Wolf and grab a D or 2 We gotta retain any then we will likely want Holtz too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thebrewcrew Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 22 minutes ago, phoenix66 said: Yep.. the Schneider trade sets a precedent for that . Yes I know Schneider was a bit younger but he was also semi unproven .. We can use the cap space to grab somebody like a Talbot to mentor Wolf and grab a D or 2 We gotta retain any then we will likely want Holtz too Kuemper traded to Avalanche by Coyotes, replaces Grubauer | NHL.com I think this is more what we are looking at. The Schneider trade was 11yrs ago. Cory Schneider was also significantly younger. There was more justification in moving a top ten pick because they were acquiring a 27yr old Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 6 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said: Kuemper traded to Avalanche by Coyotes, replaces Grubauer | NHL.com I think this is more what we are looking at. The Schneider trade was 11yrs ago. Cory Schneider was also significantly younger. There was more justification in moving a top ten pick because they were acquiring a 27yr old Markstrom>Kuemper by a very wide margin and had been basically a career backup most of his career .. also Kuemper was going into his contract year so he was more of a pending UFA stiation.Markstrom has 2 years remaining And again ..you're taking the stance that we are trying to move Markstrom and need to negotiate a deal.. in this case we set the price . Pay it or don't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thebrewcrew Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 9 minutes ago, phoenix66 said: Markstrom>Kuemper by a very wide margin and had been basically a career backup most of his career .. also Kuemper was going into his contract year so he was more of a pending UFA stiation.Markstrom has 2 years remaining And again ..you're taking the stance that we are trying to move Markstrom and need to negotiate a deal.. in this case we set the price . Pay it or don't I think you're overvaluing Markstrom and undervaluing Kuemper. When the Avalanche traded for Kuemper, he had posted save percentages north of .920 in two of the previous three seasons. On a terrible team in Arizona. It's widely believed that Markstrom wants to play for a contender. It's also believed that the Flames will accommodate that request. They can ask for the moon, doesn't mean they'll get it. Do you really want to have 3 NHL goalies on the roster next year? It never works out. I just think we need to be prepared for the return to be less than we expect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 5 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said: I think you're overvaluing Markstrom and undervaluing Kuemper. When the Avalanche traded for Kuemper, he had posted save percentages north of .920 in two of the previous three seasons. On a terrible team in Arizona. It's widely believed that Markstrom wants to play for a contender. It's also believed that the Flames will accommodate that request. They can ask for the moon, doesn't mean they'll get it. Do you really want to have 3 NHL goalies on the roster next year? It never works out. I just think we need to be prepared for the return to be less than we expect. I'm sure they are willing to accommodate him.. but only if it benefits us . They are in the premium position. We have an asset that others want.. but we are under zero pressure to move it ..that means you need to overpay to acquire it . Simple economics And dont kid yourself ..if we do trade him..they're signing a vet . One thing you can be 100% certain of ..we are under no circumstances entering next season conceding the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted June 11 Author Report Share Posted June 11 1 hour ago, The_People1 said: Markstrom straight up for #10? I suspect that Connie is thinking less of a number overall and more about a package of a 1st, a roster player and a prospect. I don't think just the 10th does it for him. Maybe the 10th plus a roster player plus a prospect for Markstrom and 28th. Not a scrub either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conundrumed Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 There's always the chance of, "didn't see that coming". There's always a lot more going on than insiders saying, "what I'm hearing". What do they hear, actually? 20% maybe? Just leaks, not ruptures. We know some GMs only negotiate in absolute silence and expect the same, or they're done talking to you. Because insiders only report on what drips to each other, it is often incorrect. They are painting by numbers and don't have nearly enough paint to see the whole picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 14 hours ago, phoenix66 said: Some interesting points for sure .. should be interesting. Biggest thing I also took from that is Flames have set a price. They aren't initiating the process..but rather open to listening . My guess is if hes not traded by draft , for the price the flames have set.. then he's off the table . Tho at the end of the day I suspect the Devils will meet it I did not take the same. I understood that the Flames set a price at the TDL and now are scrambling a bit to try and get close to what they were asking for then. I don't agree that the Flames hold the cards here. I think Markstrom has asked to be traded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 15 minutes ago, cross16 said: I did not take the same. I understood that the Flames set a price at the TDL and now are scrambling a bit to try and get close to what they were asking for then. I don't agree that the Flames hold the cards here. I think Markstrom has asked to be traded. I have no doubt he has let it be known he'd like to be moved for a better chance at a cup. But that doesn't mean they have a window to do it, or even that they have to do it at all. Pretty sure Sam Bennett went a couple seasons on an open request . His request likely plays a big factor in the fact they're even discussing it . He doesnt dictate it.. the flames do. He's under contract to the flames for 2 more seasons. It's even in his best interest (should he not be traded this offseason , but I believe he will) to play his butt off and be the guy he can be to keep his value up . It's not like he can walk.. and he doesn't strike me as a locker room cancer guy . He's a pro .. On the flipside NJ has made it apparent he is their #1 target . Ottawa seems to be hot on him as well..the Travis green history likely helps their push in that regard . Conroy simply tells both the price and first to meet it gets him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 12 minutes ago, phoenix66 said: I have no doubt he has let it be known he'd like to be moved for a better chance at a cup. But that doesn't mean they have a window to do it, or even that they have to do it at all. Pretty sure Sam Bennett went a couple seasons on an open request . His request likely plays a big factor in the fact they're even discussing it . He doesnt dictate it.. the flames do. He's under contract to the flames for 2 more seasons. It's even in his best interest (should he not be traded this offseason , but I believe he will) to play his butt off and be the guy he can be to keep his value up . It's not like he can walk.. and he doesn't strike me as a locker room cancer guy . He's a pro .. On the flipside NJ has made it apparent he is their #1 target . Ottawa seems to be hot on him as well..the Travis green history likely helps their push in that regard . Conroy simply tells both the price and first to meet it gets him. Less than a season. Requested a trade about 1 month or 2 into the season and they moved him at the TDL the same year. It's pretty rare for trade requests to go on that long. Anytime you are dealing with a NMC and a trade request I just don't agree the team holds all the cards but to each their own. We are clearly on very different pages here. Await the return but i think it's being overshot here. I'm expecting roughly the Keumper package, but likely a little less, in return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted June 11 Author Report Share Posted June 11 10 minutes ago, phoenix66 said: I have no doubt he has let it be known he'd like to be moved for a better chance at a cup. But that doesn't mean they have a window to do it, or even that they have to do it at all. Pretty sure Sam Bennett went a couple seasons on an open request . His request likely plays a big factor in the fact they're even discussing it . He doesnt dictate it.. the flames do. He's under contract to the flames for 2 more seasons. It's even in his best interest (should he not be traded this offseason , but I believe he will) to play his butt off and be the guy he can be to keep his value up . It's not like he can walk.. and he doesn't strike me as a locker room cancer guy . He's a pro .. On the flipside NJ has made it apparent he is their #1 target . Ottawa seems to be hot on him as well..the Travis green history likely helps their push in that regard . Conroy simply tells both the price and first to meet it gets him. I think an unhappy goalie is a lot different than an unhappy Bennett. Top position on the team and if he has soured, then you have to act. Whatever the situation was at TDL, they boobed up by not closing the deal. We are moving you and want to move you, but we didn't quite get there. Maybe later. We said we would only ask you if we were close, and we got close to being close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 3 minutes ago, travel_dude said: I think an unhappy goalie is a lot different than an unhappy Bennett. Top position on the team and if he has soured, then you have to act. Whatever the situation was at TDL, they boobed up by not closing the deal. We are moving you and want to move you, but we didn't quite get there. Maybe later. We said we would only ask you if we were close, and we got close to being close. Kind of on that note ..in this day and age it's utterly impossible to not have any info..but I wouldn't doubt Conny learned his lesson and any talks currently have gag orders on them ala Big Lou.. some have even speculated deals are done and sitting in a drawer until the finals are over ..not so sure about that ..but I doubt we'll know anything substantial until it's done this time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted June 11 Author Report Share Posted June 11 1 minute ago, cross16 said: Less than a season. Requested a trade about 1 month or 2 into the season and they moved him at the TDL the same year. It's pretty rare for trade requests to go on that long. Anytime you are dealing with a NMC and a trade request I just don't agree the team holds all the cards but to each their own. We are clearly on very different pages here. Await the return but i think it's being overshot here. I'm expecting roughly the Keumper package, but likely a little less, in return. No doubt the offers may be lower than we hope. I'm still thinking it will be something close to what was being offered at TDL. Doubt you get a player like Mercer unless that is the major part of it. The fact they seem to be talking ahead of the draft may suggest a pick is part of any package. But I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted June 11 Author Report Share Posted June 11 1 minute ago, phoenix66 said: Kind of on that note ..in this day and age it's utterly impossible to not have any info..but I wouldn't doubt Conny learned his lesson and any talks currently have gag orders on them ala Big Lou.. some have even speculated deals are done and sitting in a drawer until the finals are over ..not so sure about that ..but I doubt we'll know anything substantial until it's done this time Some speculation that Mercer was the ask, while others suggested that 1st + Holtz was not enough if salary retained. Still others suggested that the call came from above that we wouldn't do it at all if money retained. With BT, you didn't know about anything until the last minute. Or after the fact (when not completed). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 9 minutes ago, travel_dude said: Some speculation that Mercer was the ask, while others suggested that 1st + Holtz was not enough if salary retained. Still others suggested that the call came from above that we wouldn't do it at all if money retained. With BT, you didn't know about anything until the last minute. Or after the fact (when not completed). At that time the first was unknown ..and to be honest it likely could have become a sub 16 if they'd made the deal... Now that the pick is #10.. I'd think the first and Holtz would get it done ..maybe even with a bit of retention to get Holtz in the deal .. they want #28 as well then now it's Mercer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 I would do this trade. 7oa will have a really good player. Buium or Dickinson. Buium outscored Quinn Hughes in his draft year. He's the real deal. 70-point NHL defenseman. Game breaker. Potential core player. If Buium is gone then take Dickinson. Korpisalo posted some of the worst stats in the NHL last season but that's an anomaly. He's been "decent" otherwise in his career. Buy low scenario. He's getting paid $4-mil when he's worth $2-mil. So about $2-mil overpaid which is not as bad as it looks. Wolf needs a vet to shelter and bridge him over as a starter. Korpisalo is the perfect goalie for this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 11 minutes ago, The_People1 said: I would do this trade. 7oa will have a really good player. Buium or Dickinson. Buium outscored Quinn Hughes in his draft year. He's the real deal. 70-point NHL defenseman. Game breaker. Potential core player. If Buium is gone then take Dickinson. Korpisalo posted some of the worst stats in the NHL last season but that's an anomaly. He's been "decent" otherwise in his career. Buy low scenario. He's getting paid $4-mil when he's worth $2-mil. So about $2-mil overpaid which is not as bad as it looks. Wolf needs a vet to shelter and bridge him over as a starter. Korpisalo is the perfect goalie for this. 4 years of korpisalo is hard to stomach but not the worst thing in the world if he can even remotely bounce back .. potential future buyout candidate .. I've read a couple times that another stumbling block with jersey is their desire to also include a goalie ..I'd take korpisalo over any of theirs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted June 11 Author Report Share Posted June 11 14 minutes ago, The_People1 said: I would do this trade. 7oa will have a really good player. Buium or Dickinson. Buium outscored Quinn Hughes in his draft year. He's the real deal. 70-point NHL defenseman. Game breaker. Potential core player. If Buium is gone then take Dickinson. Korpisalo posted some of the worst stats in the NHL last season but that's an anomaly. He's been "decent" otherwise in his career. Buy low scenario. He's getting paid $4-mil when he's worth $2-mil. So about $2-mil overpaid which is not as bad as it looks. Wolf needs a vet to shelter and bridge him over as a starter. Korpisalo is the perfect goalie for this. We have 3 goalies that can play this season and we are taking back one as part of the trade? He is nowhere what we need in a goalie coming with a $4M price tag. Only if we turn around and deal Korpisalo to NJ (or similar team). And even that doesn't excite me because it would be a crap trade for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 Per the mang comment .. I think this is one you take what you can get..we got a logjam of forwards..still need to add a center .. to me he's the odd man out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted June 11 Author Report Share Posted June 11 6 minutes ago, phoenix66 said: 4 years of korpisalo is hard to stomach but not the worst thing in the world if he can even remotely bounce back .. potential future buyout candidate .. I've read a couple times that another stumbling block with jersey is their desire to also include a goalie ..I'd take korpisalo over any of theirs They don't really have any goalie to include. They have a pending UFA and one year of Allen. Taking Allen (why would they even do that) just means we have to trade him this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted June 11 Author Report Share Posted June 11 I don't really follow anything The Fourth Period comes out with. Right up there with Editor in Leaf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 6 minutes ago, travel_dude said: We have 3 goalies that can play this season and we are taking back one as part of the trade? He is nowhere what we need in a goalie coming with a $4M price tag. Only if we turn around and deal Korpisalo to NJ (or similar team). And even that doesn't excite me because it would be a crap trade for us. Well to be fair if we do the trade we'd only have 2 ..so we'd be adding a 3rd.. sounds to me the flames are saying they won't take back goalies tho fwiw. And like I said earlier if we do trade Marky I fully expect us to sign a UFA like Talbot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conundrumed Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 11 minutes ago, The_People1 said: I would do this trade. 7oa will have a really good player. Buium or Dickinson. Buium outscored Quinn Hughes in his draft year. He's the real deal. 70-point NHL defenseman. Game breaker. Potential core player. If Buium is gone then take Dickinson. Korpisalo posted some of the worst stats in the NHL last season but that's an anomaly. He's been "decent" otherwise in his career. Buy low scenario. He's getting paid $4-mil when he's worth $2-mil. So about $2-mil overpaid which is not as bad as it looks. Wolf needs a vet to shelter and bridge him over as a starter. Korpisalo is the perfect goalie for this. Garrioch is a tool. What I do like is that we'll just say no if we don't like the deal. I agree with @phoenix66 in this regard. We, honestly, don't have to do Satoshi Nakamoto. If you want him, give me solid return, because I'd actually rather keep him. We aren't in a panic to trade Markstrom. So much rhetoric around it, like we gaf about his cap hit these days. We don't. He's OUR goalie. If you want to unmake him my goalie, you're gonna pay. If I end up with nothing, so what? So do you. Conroy has zero to lose in playing this way. We're rebuilding. Max out values on the few assets we have or don't bother. It's not going to be a significant difference. We all know we have open roster spots 6 ways from Sunday. We need something of everything for a team. This is not going to be fast. Nailing a Markstrom return is not going to put much of a dent into it. It would be a small start. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 6 minutes ago, conundrumed said: Garrioch is a tool. What I do like is that we'll just say no if we don't like the deal. I agree with @phoenix66 in this regard. We, honestly, don't have to do Satoshi Nakamoto. If you want him, give me solid return, because I'd actually rather keep him. We aren't in a panic to trade Markstrom. So much rhetoric around it, like we gaf about his cap hit these days. We don't. He's OUR goalie. If you want to unmake him my goalie, you're gonna pay. If I end up with nothing, so what? So do you. Conroy has zero to lose in playing this way. We're rebuilding. Max out values on the few assets we have or don't bother. It's not going to be a significant difference. We all know we have open roster spots 6 ways from Sunday. We need something of everything for a team. This is not going to be fast. Nailing a Markstrom return is not going to put much of a dent into it. It would be a small start. 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. 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