Toggle sidebar

Armchair GM 2024-25 Season, Craig Conroy's Can Do Calgary Flames

JPeeper said:
I'd rather self immolate. Also, the Calgary pick isn't even tradable nor will the Canadians end up with it in the end anyway.
Click to expand...
the Canadians can trade that conditional pick at any time it is just an asset for them and they do not control which pick is received they can even make a conditional pick trade that specifically trades the Flames 2025 1st if they receive it or one of their others 1sts if they don't. Its the Flames that can't do anything with their 2025, 2026 1sts and Florida's 1st until which pick is locked in
Benstheman said:
What you guys think of Matheson + Calgary's 1st for R.Andersson and Pospisil?

Matheson is in the same spot as Andersson as far a contract is concerned. Will ask for less on his next contract though. Probably in the 5,5M$-6M$ range.

Calgary are pretty much set on the right side while they could use some help on the left side. Habs is set on the left side and needs a more stable top 4 on the right side.

You can either trade Matheson back for futures or extend him, depending on the direction your team is taking.
Click to expand...
based on the timing and the fact that both Montreal and Calgary are competing for a playoff spot this trade can only occur once the season is completed since I would assume the teams would want their new dmen to play in the playoffs if they make them and I would assume the draft lotto has taken place.
Regardless that is a horrendous unbalanced offer on the scale of the original Monahan and a conditional 1st trade
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kahvi
Kahvi said:
Do have a potential #1C and some other good pieces to offer? Do you want retention? Handshake deal for extension or risk it he doesnt want to sign extension?

From Flames pov, with Andersson it’s about if he wants to sign and for what price. That has an huge effect on his trade value. If he wants to sign, you’d need overpayment. If not, the price is lower.
Click to expand...
What??
 
DomBarr said:
the Canadians can trade that conditional pick at any time it is just an asset for them and they do not control which pick is received they can even make a conditional pick trade that specifically trades the Flames 2025 1st if they receive it or one of their others 1sts if they don't. Its the Flames that can't do anything with their 2025, 2026 1sts and Florida's 1st until which pick is locked in

based on the timing and the fact that both Montreal and Calgary are competing for a playoff spot this trade can only occur once the season is completed since I would assume the teams would want their new dmen to play in the playoffs if they make them and I would assume the draft lotto has taken place.
Regardless that is a horrendous unbalanced offer on the scale of the original Monahan and a conditional 1st trade
Click to expand...
How so?

Do you think Pospisil is worth Calgary's pick??
 
Benstheman said:
What??
Click to expand...
Yes, potential #1C. Not surefire elite 1C. Because thats the piece Flames are looking for. I know I said +other pieces, but it all depends who you have. If Flames trade Andersson, imo it should be for a potential first line center, with pieces added on eithetr side. Montreal might not be the right team for this though, but you asked.
 
DomBarr said:
the Canadians can trade that conditional pick at any time it is just an asset for them and they do not control which pick is received they can even make a conditional pick trade that specifically trades the Flames 2025 1st if they receive it or one of their others 1sts if they don't. Its the Flames that can't do anything with their 2025, 2026 1sts and Florida's 1st until which pick is locked in

based on the timing and the fact that both Montreal and Calgary are competing for a playoff spot this trade can only occur once the season is completed since I would assume the teams would want their new dmen to play in the playoffs if they make them and I would assume the draft lotto has taken place.
Regardless that is a horrendous unbalanced offer on the scale of the original Monahan and a conditional 1st trade
Click to expand...
Off course that's a deal happening after the season is done.
 
Kahvi said:
Yes, potential #1C. Not surefire elite 1C. Because thats the piece Flames are looking for. I know I said +other pieces, but it all depends who you have. If Flames trade Andersson, imo it should be for a potential first line center, with pieces added on eithetr side. Montreal might not be the right team for this though, but you asked.
Click to expand...
Come on man, Andersson doesn't get you that kind of return. You gotta be kidding me.
 
Benstheman said:
Come on man, Andersson doesn't get you that kind of return. You gotta be kidding me.
Click to expand...
Andersson is on a very good deal for another year, and he’s a first pairing rhd. He’s definitely at least a main part for a potential #1C, depending who that prospect is. Why should the Flames trade him for lesser pieces? Montreal might not be a fit, but some contender, especially if he’s retained.
 
Kahvi said:
Andersson is on a very good deal for another year, and he’s a first pairing rhd. He’s definitely at least a main part for a potential #1C, depending who that prospect is. Why should the Flames trade him for lesser pieces? Montreal might not be a fit, but some contender, especially if he’s retained.
Click to expand...
I would say he is a no.2 D but this year he sucks bad. I know he is normally better than this but nobody gives you that if he doesn't want to resign in Calgary.
 
Benstheman said:
I would say he is a no.2 D but this year he sucks bad. I know he is normally better than this but nobody gives you that if he doesn't want to resign in Calgary.
Click to expand...
So why do you want to trade for him? With him sucking bad this year according to you. Is Montreal looking for players that suck?
 
Benstheman said:
Come on man, Andersson doesn't get you that kind of return. You gotta be kidding me.
Click to expand...

Based on the price paid for guys like Frost, Cozens and Norris, it's not ridiculous to believe the assets from Andersson could be close to targeting a 2C/3C with a shot at low end 1C. We're not talking about wanting an established 1C or sure fire 1C for Andersson.

Think something like the Reinhart trade, maybe even Bennett trade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benstheman
Fig said:
Based on the price paid for guys like Frost, Cozens and Norris, it's not ridiculous to believe the assets from Andersson could be close to targeting a 2C/3C with a shot at low end 1C. We're not talking about wanting an established 1C or sure fire 1C for Andersson.

Think something like the Reinhart trade, maybe even Bennett trade.
Click to expand...
If traded, I think the return will be similar to that of Sergachev. maybe a little less... as I don't think Serg term was seen as a good thing due to him coming off the the broken leg (incidentally in his first game back after missing almost 2 months with a foot injury)

So in the neighborhood of younger Replacement D with middle 4 potential, good non-bluechip C prospect and a 2nd... if we get a first, we'd get a lesser prospect
 
  • Like
Reactions: Darth Vladar
Lunatik said:
If traded, I think the return will be similar to that of Sergachev. maybe a little less... as I don't think Serg term was seen as a good thing due to him coming off the the broken leg (incidentally in his first game back after missing almost 2 months with a foot injury)

So in the neighborhood of younger Replacement D with middle 4 potential, good non-bluechip C prospect and a 2nd... if we get a first, we'd get a lesser prospect
Click to expand...

I was also thinking of the Lindholm trade(s). My assumption is that an Andersson return is 1st + 2nd. Then if the assumption is that what we want is closer to two 1st (2/3C with low end 1C upside), Andersson on his own is pretty close to targeting what we are aiming for.

Using Eichel as the bar, a good 1C is going to be closer to 3-4 firsts. A low end 1C like Lindholm is kinda like two firsts and a second (assuming Kuzmenko was cap dump).

The only thing I think is a flaw to my logic is that many teams are looking for a 2C. So the price of such a 2C player might be slightly higher than 2x 1st, but perhaps not quite 3x 1st due to specific demand in that type of asset.
 
Fig said:
I was also thinking of the Lindholm trade(s). My assumption is that an Andersson return is 1st + 2nd. Then if the assumption is that what we want is closer to two 1st (2/3C with low end 1C upside), Andersson on his own is pretty close to targeting what we are aiming for.

Using Eichel as the bar, a good 1C is going to be closer to 3-4 firsts. A low end 1C like Lindholm is kinda like two firsts and a second (assuming Kuzmenko was cap dump).

The only thing I think is a flaw to my logic is that many teams are looking for a 2C. So the price of such a 2C player might be slightly higher than 2x 1st, but perhaps not quite 3x 1st due to specific demand in that type of asset.
Click to expand...
You also can't use forwards to gauge the value of defensemen, the markets are completely different... even in the same position year to year the market can change drastically. That is actually my concern with moving Andersson at the draft or even July 1st, I'm not sure the market will be there when the UFA pool of defensemen is really good this year and the cap is going up a lot.
 
Lunatik said:
You also can't use forwards to gauge the value of defensemen, the markets are completely different... even in the same position year to year the market can change drastically. That is actually my concern with moving Andersson at the draft or even July 1st, I'm not sure the market will be there when the UFA pool of defensemen is really good this year and the cap is going up a lot.
Click to expand...

Agreed. That's why I attempted to convert the player values to futures based on the current expectation of value. I don't think I waver too far from my expectation of a 1st and a 2nd for Anderson. There's a strong UFA pool, but those guys are all likely asking 7+. Andersson's cap hit in the 4s is worth something even if the supply is somewhat soft. I still think 1st and 2nd is a reasonable expectation for him.
 
I think they should bring back Vladar. Nothing obscene, a 3.5x3 but I'm not that impressed with the UFA goalie market and Cooley should stay as a 3rd stringer
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fig
If we trade Andersson I am still looking at Buffalo. NJ first + Andersson for their first.

Realistically we could acquire a player like Ostlund, maybe Helenius. If it’s Montreal then I’d want Hage.

It just doesn’t make sense to sign a RD long term with Brewski, Parekh, Mews and Weegar (can play LD) in the system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
adding hide avatars option

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom