Rumor: Pagnotta: Flames are exploring trade market on Nazem Kadri

Forge

Blissfully Mediocre
Jul 4, 2018
13,172
16,365
Vincent Clortho School for wizards
I mean, i see everyone say this, explain? how so? where is it so evident that Kadri will magically decline anytime soon, making the contract an anchor? lets say even if there would be just 2 years of solid 2C play left, where then it would be 3 years left and the cap higher in two years time, i doubt 7 million will be some anchor for an assumed decent 3C with 3 years left if we assume he declines at all to that level, that quickly. People need to catch up to the cap changing.

Aging curves are a thing. If you don't believe in them, more power to you. There are exceptions. I generally don't chase exceptions. I suspect in a couple more years, he won't be very good at hockey and this contract covers 5 more years at ages 34, 35, 36, 37 and 38.

Anchors aren't always defined by the being a certain amount. Ryan Suter just got bought out of a contract that was less than 4 million. The devils bought out Janne Kuokkanen a few years ago at less than 2 million. If the team sucks and they don't need to buy him out because why bother, I guess yay contract victory?
 

biturbo19

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
27,200
12,340
Well it's really just Lindholm and maybe Stamkos as other top 6 options and they both have their negatives as well.

So ya, it is a weak market but there's never that much that makes it to July 1st

Stephenson out there too. And Stamkos isn't even really a Center at this point.

But yeah. It's ugly.
 

madmike77

Registered User
Jan 9, 2009
6,722
660
I suspect Kadri has asked the Flames to explore trades for him. There’s really no incentive for the Flames to deal him. They don’t need the cap room. And they won’t be willing to add assets to move him.

They’re likely just being polite and trying to make Kadri happy.

I think players who sign these long-term deals in their 30s have to understand there’s some risk involved on their end. They won’t always get what they want. And they may wind up in a lousy situation where they’re hard to trade. If you chase the money there’s a price to pay.
 

Petes2424

Registered User
Aug 4, 2005
8,487
3,292
If he’s moving, he’s choosing where he’s gonna go. Look for it to be an Atlantic team, as he still wants to stick it to the Leafs. Boston, Detroit or how about Ottawa? Talk about throwing some fire on a rivalry. That’s be great to see.
 

Ledge And Dairy

Registered User
Who the f*** would take that contract.
Calgary playing parlour games saying the have no interest in moving him.

No. You have no interest in the shitty return you will get Conroy.
Like most of your recent trades.
We just saw Dubois get traded for positive value after a horrendous season. Kadri literally didn't show up for the first 10 games of this season and still would have lead your team in points this year. For a team that is pushing to win a cup in the next ~3 years (ie your Jets or a team like the Canes) he is absolutely a player they would target. His playstyle is very similar to Sam Bennett and we just witnessed how effective that was over the last 2 months, plus he's already proven to be a very effective player on a championship winning team.

You are right that Calgary isn't going to just offload him for nothing but if you think there would not be interested parties that would willingly offer positive value returns you are a fool
 

PensandCaps

Beddy Tlueger
May 22, 2015
27,842
18,282
Aging curves are a thing. If you don't believe in them, more power to you. There are exceptions. I generally don't chase exceptions. I suspect in a couple more years, he won't be very good at hockey and this contract covers 5 more years at ages 34, 35, 36, 37 and 38.

Anchors aren't always defined by the being a certain amount. Ryan Suter just got bought out of a contract that was less than 4 million. The devils bought out Janne Kuokkanen a few years ago at less than 2 million. If the team sucks and they don't need to buy him out because why bother, I guess yay contract victory?
its not like hes going to become terrible by next year. All you need is 2 to 3 solid years from him, which seems very likely. and 7 million is not that big of a deal anymore.
 

JTToilinginToronto

Isles Fan
Jan 18, 2019
4,952
5,136
idk, short term impact?
He's already 34 years old when next season starts.

I mean if it's one or even two years left on his deal, sure whatever, it might make sense for a team to take a chance.

But commitment to him for ages 34-39 seems crazy to me, especially since Calgary probably already got the best value out of him during the duration of his contract.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Devonator

stl76

No. 5 in your programs, No. 1 in your hearts
Jul 2, 2015
9,435
8,977
Hilarious thread title. Good luck with that :laugh:
 

treple13

Registered User
Sep 1, 2013
2,849
1,528
Calgary is 100% not retaining on him barring a ridiculous return. 5 years of having a retention spot filled costs us a tons of potential assets. Plus Kadri at his current contract is pretty much fair value. He was worth more than $7million last year. Likely won't the last few years, but that's a tradeoff.

Teams that want to win now and don't care about years down the road (Eg. Boston/Toronto/Winnipeg) should be all over this
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kahvi

JPeeper

Registered User
Jan 4, 2015
12,165
9,589
Usual HF malarkey where 95% in the thread hasn't watched the player play and just speaking out their ass. Kadri if traded won't be a cap dump, it will be for assets because he is a good player making reasonable money.
 

OtherThingsILike

Registered User
May 6, 2020
1,715
1,461
Pittsburgh
As a Penguins fan, Kadri is one of the few 30+ players I'd be excited to acquire.
As long as we don't have to give up too much, we could take him with no retention needed.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad