Rumor: Pagnotta: "Rasmus Andersson is open to a trade, he would welcome it" It would cost 3 assets...1st rnd pick, prospect, +
- Thread starter UrbanImpact
- Start date
Ledge And Dairy
Registered User
AFAIK the NCAA rules still state you can't play there if you are under a contract and Parekh already signed his ELC. But for arguments sake, let's say he does in fact not play in the NHL next season. Calgary has Weegar who is a RHS and can play on either side, Miromanov, and Pachal. They also have Brzustewicz who was one of the final cuts at camp. Lastly teams are always looking to move out cap. The Flames could easily take on the last year of Holl or Chiarot's contracts.
Also no idea how you came to the conclusion Andersson is the only defenseman on the Flames that can cover for Parekh's defensive woes is Andersson. Weegar and Bahl are far better defensively than him and would do a drastically better job at covering for him.
Habs Halifax
Loyal Habs Fan
Because it's a solution for us beyond this season and we would like to fill a RD hole.
I guess I don't understand why Calgary would be doing this when they're pretty good.
As much as I'd like Detroit being in on him, I dunno if Yzerman sees him having a long term spot with ASP on the horizon.
As much as I'd like Detroit being in on him, I dunno if Yzerman sees him having a long term spot with ASP on the horizon.
Habs Halifax
Loyal Habs Fan
Habs have Reinbacher on the horizon as well but thinking these young guys can fill a hole at age 20 is a reach. Both the Wings and Habs want to move up the standings as well. It's mostly about how to get improvements now without gutting the system or creating other holes.
Flames might move Andersson if they feel he won't extend. Yes, they are chasing the playoffs but they are not dumb. They know they are in no mans land (mid pack of the NHL). If they get good offers and a young D in return that can play now, they consider it no doubt.
Issue with Detroit is more:
1. They don't need him to be a 1RD, just a 2RD.
2. Yzerman doesn't trade assets for anybody he doesn't view being with the team long term.
3. How much do Rasmus want in an extension? This is likely why Yzerman dumped Hronek. Or at least part of the reason why.
johnnystormcgy
Registered User
- May 26, 2007
- 525
- 269
Why does Buffalo do anything? They should just keep being a feeder team to the rest of the league.
In all seriousness - You've got 1.5 seasons to sign him full time, if the Sabres can't make themselves better and more attractive to FAs in that timeline, what makes you think Tage, Tuch or Dahlin will want to be there anymore? Buffalo needs to start taking some risks for the betterment of their team.
Fjordy
Soul Dancing in the Dark
- Jun 20, 2018
- 19,470
- 10,822
Cart before the horse. Gotta reshape the team before we take risks on rentals. If Sabres went and got EP I would say 100% go get him too.
crackdown44
Cold milk cools down hot food
- Dec 1, 2017
- 4,686
- 5,802
You’re not wrong but he’s not a rental, at the very least Buffalo could recoup assets for him at next year’s deadline if he doesn’t want to sign
Not as much as it would cost to get him this year but imo you’re still getting a 1st + next year for him. Not 100% sure it’s a risk the sabres should be taking but they’ve gotta try something at some point
I don't disagree. The issue we have is the core, which complicates simply adding. I would be happy if Adams made a futures trade for him no question.
ManofSteel55
Registered User
I'm sure Edmonton would be interested in this price. I'm also sure that Conroy would make Edmonton pay a rivals tax, if he would trade him there at all. It would be funny given how much he hates the Oilers - and likely, how much some of the Oilers hate him too.
1st in 2026, Matvey Petrov, 2nd in 2025. But again, I don't see these two teams trading, especially when its a key player on one team.
1st in 2026, Matvey Petrov, 2nd in 2025. But again, I don't see these two teams trading, especially when its a key player on one team.
SwedishFire
Registered User
- Mar 3, 2011
- 5,453
- 1,921
Why would Calgary lile to take Vancouvers spill/left overs? Thats not players that carries tje team or have great potential, its one dimensional NHLers who has reached where they are what they are.
Habs Halifax
Loyal Habs Fan
DFF
Registered User
- Feb 28, 2002
- 22,454
- 6,673
It’s the usual, throw in everything you don’t want , the more the better. Who cares what the other team thinks.
Connor McConnor
Registered User
- Nov 22, 2017
- 5,626
- 6,740
Raty isn't exactly a throw-in, I see a potential decent middle six centre there. I do think Rasmus returns a better prospect than that but it all depends on what the acquiring team values. We've seen GMs target prospects we didn't rate highly before on HF.
Ledge And Dairy
Registered User
30th is GF and 30th in PK is not "pretty good"
This teams current standings are heavily misleading. They have feasted on OT points and have had very good goaltending at 5v5. Also due to location they tend to face teams backup goalies or get a lot of 2nd of b2b games from their opponents.
crackdown44
Cold milk cools down hot food
- Dec 1, 2017
- 4,686
- 5,802
Tbf their GD above expected is like 28th in the league at -14.1 but their expected goals against is top 10. They just can’t finish on top of the fact that they don’t generate a lot of offense
Vladar has been pretty bad and the PK has been atrocious. They aren’t over performing by any metric.
You could argue based on roster construction they shouldn’t be as good as they are but it’s not like they’re getting unreal finishing or insane goaltending. No PDO wave, if anything it’s the opposite. Just a well coached team playing well but the players are mostly average
Ledge And Dairy
Registered User
Yeah that's just not even close to cutting it. Even ignoring the probable rival tax that offer is quite easily beaten by most teams around the league
ManofSteel55
Registered User
Well, it hits the "1st, prospect and another piece" requirements. I don't think anyone is including a blue chip prospect. But yes, we would have to pay an ungodly rival tax. And that is if he doesn't have us on his NTC list, ha ha.
Management is finally rebuilding the Flames. Nobody told the players, but I think, just as everyone is surprised they are where they are now, most would be surprised if they are still in the playoff hunt come March 7.
Some Other Flame
Registered User
- Dec 4, 2010
- 8,194
- 10,629
Even if you ignore that Murray Edwards, Andersson and Conroy all don't want any part of helping Edmonton, the Oilers simply don't have the competitive pieces to get a deal done anyway. Every team in the league could easily beat that offer if they wanted to
ManofSteel55
Registered User
I'm pretty sure I mentioned the rival tax, so nobody is ignoring that Calgary isn't looking to do this trade. My offer included the required parts - a 1st, a prospect, and another piece. Sure, every team COULD beat that offer, but not every team is going to be interested in adding players, and many others aren't going to have the cap space to add players. Edmonton could make a better offer too, but just as Calgary isn't interested in "helping Edmonton", Edmonton isn't interested in paying significantly above the asking price for Andersson based on the presumption that "every team could beat that deal".
I wouldn’t say huge value. But he will get a decent return.
