Flames Trade Deadline 2015: A Preview Roundtable

We’re now firmly in the swing of Trade Deadline Week here at FlamesNation, and it’s time to check in with our team before the team we cover trades everybody away for magic beans. So we checked in with Mike Cadarette, Arii, Byron Bader, Beloch and me to see how we think the next week-or-so will play out.

Add your takes in the comments!

1) In your perfect world, who (or what) would the Flames acquire at the trade deadline?

Mike: Young-ish defensive prospects would help this rebuild immensely. In a perfect world, Scott Harrington (Pittsburgh), Stephen Johns (Chicago), or Joe Morrow (Boston) would become a Calgary Flame (or Adirondack Flame) on March 2nd. Early round picks would also be ideal.
I would love to see an established second pairing defenseman join the Flames who can take a few minutes off of the current top-4.

Arii: A young, top four defenceman. Preferably someone no older than his lateish mid-20s, although if it was someone like, say, Zbynek Michalek, I’d be fine with that too, just as long as he doesn’t cost any meaningful future assets. But ideally someone who can play top four, and play top four for a long while yet, would be awesome and address probably the roster’s biggest weakness for now and the future.

Byron: Zybnek Michalek or Patrick Wiercioch or Adam Larsson, and Phil Kessel.

Beloch: In a perfect world, it would be a youngish #3 defenceman who, when paired with Russell or Wideman, would drive play in the right direction.

Ryan: Ideally, I’d love if they could add a second pairing defender in their early 20s who could push Dennis Wideman down to the third pairing. Some functional bottom six players to join Bouma would be nice, as would picks. Many, many picks.

2) What do you think they will actually acquire at the trade deadline?

Mike: At the deadline, considering Glencross is in play, I think it’s reasonable to expect Treliving to pick up a second-round pick and a ‘B’ prospect for him. GMs tend to give up their Swiss bank account on deadline day, so I think Glencross could net the Flames a return like that depending on the desperation of the GM on the other end of the phone.

Arii: Uhhh. Maybe Michalek actually will be the guy with the Treliving-Phoenix connection, but I’m not actually sure. I think at minimum the Flames will have a couple of extra picks for the draft, but I doubt any of them are higher than second rounders, if even that.

Byron: Much worse defencemen [than I mentioned previously].

Beloch: I’m answering this question along with Question 4 because they really are co-dependent. Given the early state of the rebuild, the Flames want to keep their picks and prospects and obtain long-term contributors. Given the tight playoff race, the Flames also want to keep their veterans or obtain, in trade for them, players ready to contribute now. This limits what Treliving can do. A near-ideal trade would be to move Glencross, Wideman, and Ramo for a less valuable backup goalie (for depth) and that white whale #3D. Even if the defensive gain doesn’t quite balance the loss in offense, such a trade would allow the Flames to make a credible run at the playoffs without being forced to watch multiple UFA’s walk in the summer.
If Treliving doesn’t pull off a miracle trade, should he stand pat or trade his pending UFA’s?. Standing pat and missing the playoffs would be worst-case scenario. It’s a loss, both in the long and short term. Conversely, trading Glencross and Ramo for future-friendly assets and making the playoffs is win-win. If Treliving trades Ramo and Glencross, this protects him from the worst-case and gives him a shot at the jackpot.

Ryan: I think the Flames could be very busy or the Flames could do next to nothing. At worst, I expect moves similar to the Drew Shore deal – lower profile “tinkering” trades designed to bring in assets that could pay off. That and Treliving adding draft picks.

3) In your perfect world, who (or what) would the Flames trade away at the trade deadline?

Mike: In a perfect world, Deryk Engelland is sold for a late pick and Wotherspoon is brought in to fill his spot. That would never happen though considering his cap hit. I also think it would be mutually beneficial if Glencross is shipped out. The Flames would advance the rebuild with picks/prospects and Scoreface can get his chance at a Stanley Cup.

Arii: Curtis Glencross for sure. Karri Ramo. Any way to get rid of Brandon Bollig and Deryk Engelland would be awesome.

Byron: Engelland, Glencross and Ramo

Beloch: Glencross, Ramo and Wideman. The first two are both pending UFA’s who seem unlikely to sign extensions, so it’s time to move them. Wideman is not a UFA, but trading him now would be “selling high” thanks to his shiny point total. Defensively, he’s an anchor on the Flames second pair and the Flames tend to bury their third pair in defensive zone starts where Wideman is at his weakest. This means Wideman is not an ideal fit for the Flames at present.

Ryan: I’d love for the Flames to move out some of their longer, not-great contracts (like Wideman) to get themselves a bit of flexibility in the future. And I’d prefer if they flipped any free agents that aren’t in their plans for some manner of assets, just so they don’t lose anything for nothing.

4) What do you think they will actually trade away at the trade deadline?

Mike: Short of sounding like a broken record, I think Curtis Glencross will no longer be a Flame. Burke wasn’t able to get anything for Cammalleri last season and that was a mistake (even if he was being lowballed). I don’t believe Treliving will make the same mistake.
I think there’s an outside chance that a GM inquires about Paul Byron and is dealt for a mid-round pick. With the amount of youth coming in next season, it wouldn’t hurt to move on from Paul. [Editor’s Note: Written before Byron’s injury.]

Arii: Just Glencross. Maybe a lower level prospect, like a Max Reinhart type, is gone as well to upgrade the team in another area.

Byron: Glencross for a song.

Beloch: See previous answer for question 2.

Ryan: I expect them to flip Glencross and Ramo for…something. Probably picks. And I’d also expect the Flames to ship out someone like Max Reinhart, as it seems pretty obvious that he’s not in their plans anymore. (And that’s a similar move as the Corban Knight trade, really…)

5) What is your level of trust and/or optimism regarding Brad Treliving handling his first trade deadline as a GM? Does Brian Burke’s oversight make you more or less nervous?

Mike: Treliving hasn’t shown me anything that would make me wary of his ability to do the right things on deadline day. I’ll chalk the Bollig trade on draft day as an over-anxious rookie GM making a mistake (even though the chances of that pick becoming anything are slim). So far, Treliving has said all the right things to the media about not sacrificing the future for the present.
In Burke’s (small) tenure as the Flames’ GM, he made two good moves on deadline day when he stole a second-rounder from the Avs for Reto Berra and flipped Lee Stempniak for a third-rounder.
I’m optimistic they’ll do the right things to assist the rebuild on March 2nd.

Arii: I am very trusting of him! The Bollig and Engelland oversights from the beginning of his GMing career seem more Burke-like than anything, and nothing like that has really happened since Engelland was signed. Treliving’s hitting all the right notes in his interviews so I’m really not concerned about him at all. The trade deadline will be a win if the Flames don’t lose any future assets, and anything that’ll improve them in the meantime is a bonus, and that’s what it sounds like Treliving’s goals are.
Also, Brian Burke isn’t the GM, so he’s really of no concern to me at all.

Byron: High. I think he’s done well for the most part. Makes me feel better with Burke being around. Burke doesn’t normally get fleeced.

Beloch: So far, Treliving has said the right things about the state of the rebuild and has made only minor, but smart, moves. Trading Corban Knight for Drew Shore was larceny! Meanwhile, Burke has been uncharacteristically silent. This is a situation where two minds are likely better than one. Burke or Treliving alone might feel pressured to do something, even if it’s not smart. Fortunately, if one of them is tempted to make a bad move the other guy is there to offer sober second thought. As such, there’s room for optimism. However, if a wild-haired Burke holds a press conference about the many virtues of having size and truculence, then you can panic.

Ryan: The more exposure I get to Treliving, the more I think he’s a rational, measured person who isn’t going to go hog-wild in any particular direction. Given that the Flames are at a crucial moment in the rebuild, he’s probably the right captain for this ship at this deadline.
And I’m sure Burke’s major job right now is just to go “Yeah, that sounds smart, Brad…” and collect his cheque.

  • Matty Franchise Jr

    I agree with much of what was written here, particularly Arii. I find myself enjoying the cynicism of Bader (except for #5, too rosy).

    In a perfect world, Bollig, Engelland, Wideman, GlenX, and Ramo get moved for a lot of great stuff, including a solid #3 D-man.

    I’m cautiously optimistic about BT at the deadline. Cautious because of Bollig and Engelland. Optimistic because of everything else.

  • Burnward

    Glencross will be gone for sure.

    Possibly a prospect like Reinhart, most likely as part of a package deal.

    Sven, if they can get that perfect young D they need.

    Ramo obviously stays now.

      • Rockmorton65

        That’s my take too. The only reasons we should move Sven is a) part of a package for a significant upgrade somewhere or b) acquire his equivalent in a D prospect.

        • Parallex

          Agree, but what is Sven’s equivalent? Here’s a guy that hasn’t stuck in the bigs, has underperformed and has been passed by many others in the system. Not to dump on Sven, but that’s the reality. So given that, he’s not going to attract a young pro or even a first round pick. So what’s the requirement?

          • piscera.infada

            I don’t disagree with the facts about Sven’s current standing in the organization vis-a-vis other prospects, but I have to believe that there are enough organizations out there that are in need of accessible young talent, where a player with Sven’s potential could still be a very valuable trade piece. Fact is, if you trade a prospect based on current value to your system as opposed to future potential, you run the risk of making a Forsberg for Erat or Neiderietter (sp?) for Clutterbuck type trade.

            Simple fact is, Sven definitely has played better the second half of this year. If he isn’t going to net you the return he’s worth based on potential, you tell the other GM to shove it. If a trade doesn’t happen because you didn’t feel you were getting enough for him, then “too bad”, you retain a player who may still hit his potential.

            As an aside, I undertand the merits of trading Sven, but I still believe he’ll be a player in this league. So many players like him have been given up on, only to become legitimate NHLers in their second (or third) organization. You unequivocally do not trade Sven unless you’re getting similar potential back in an area of greater need, full stop.

          • Rockmorton65

            I think you sort of answered your own question. I think the equivalent would be a young D (20-24) prospect, currently in a system that has a few other quality defensive prospects. Someone who is still considered to have NHL potential, but may not get it in their current situation due to a number of factors. Some under their control and some not. A former top pick, struggling to crack a deep lineup and that may benefit from a change of scenery would be ideal.

          • Rockmorton65

            You have to be very careful on how you value Sven Baertschi.

            He does kind of seem like a wild card in any deal.. but I think BT is smart enough to know what kind of player he’s dealing with. Patience has worked out in the cases of Backlund and Byron.

            I think there is interest in Baertschi, but if you can’t get a first round pick or a young pro you don’t make a trade.

  • Parallex

    Yeah, young defense prospects (or draft picks that can be turned into young defense prospects) should be priority #1.

    From an organizational standpoint we’re solid at C, LW, and Goal. The plan moving forward should be to shore up the D, shore up on right shooting RW’ers, and move out the deadweight.

  • mattyc

    re:Sven, Allegedly Treliving was in on Nick Leddy at the beginning of the year, but ended up out of it because he didn’t want to throw in Baertschi. In retrospect, having a strong, yound #3-4 D in Leddy may have been worth it. Having said that, if Treliving wasn’t willing to make that trade in October, I kinda doubt much has changed in his evaluation of Baertschi.

    • everton fc

      No doubt that Sven was part of the price tag to get Leddy. To Bt’s credit, at the time Leddy & Boychuk auctioning was happening, most were predicting Flames to be a front runner for the McEichel sweepstakes. I don’t blame him for not wanting to part with Sven at what appeared to be the infancy of a rebuild.

      Fast forward to today, who would have thunk it. I just hope a top pairing Dman won’t take the place of being that unicorn Centre we were desperately searching for Iggy.

      Most fan bases will have there list of Bollig’s, Engelland’s, Wideman’s (I see Columbus is shopping Wiznieski, same type of player as Wideman) & guess what, the return will be the same as trading dirty underwear. Crap is crap & sometimes it’s more appealing to just keep & smell your own crap than someone else’s.

      GlenX will get moved, have no idea what rentals are worth but that will happen on the TDL day.

      The only block buster I want to see is having BT pull the trigger & try acquiring this unicorn NHL ready projected top pairing D man. If the old Lou wants our 2015 1st & Sven or Granlund & a roster player like Byron, I’d give it to them for a 22 year 4th overall pick that is turning into a top pairing D as we speak. How huge would that be for this team. But that’s why Im not a GM. Maybe Gormerly will be a bit cheaper, I wouldn’t be disappointed if BT went after him.

  • everton fc

    Lost my last post so apologies if I post twice here.

    Any discussion about Glencross, at least for now, have to be centered around the five teams he said he’d go to, Anaheim, Tampa, Chicago, L.A. and Nashville. L.A. needs defence. I think Tampa may be in the same boat. If Chicago would move Stephen Johns for Glecross, might be worth consideration. T.J. Brennan’s only 25, Dahlbeck only 23.

    Unless the Flames are trying to help themselves by helping the Hawks free up some cap space. Then the discussion’s mighty different.

    • Rockmorton65

      I don’t see a reason why we should trade for them. They are just other Cundaris, good for the AHL but probably just not good enough to make an impact at the NHL level. In that case I would prefer draft picks.

    • Rockmorton65

      That’s the thing about Chicago that makes me curious. Last week Elliot Friedman said that The Hawks and Flames were close to a deal for GlenX, but the Hawks wanted to wait until closer to the deadline so they could clear cap space. With GlenX’s cap hit at the deadline being about 600K, I wonder if there’s a bigger deal coming?

  • Rockmorton65

    If BT can’t put together a package to get a young D-man prospect then he won’t make a trade…no draft picks please; would prefer someone with potential on the D. A drafted D will take 3-4 years in the AHL..

    Burke says the BT is the GM so don’t ask him Qs about the Flames roster. I am sure that BT consults Burke on possible actions but in the end it is BTs decision.

  • piscera.infada

    I think an old fashioned three way deal would be cool..

    Something like:

    To Cal: Keith Yandle, 3rd (Arz)

    To Chi: Curtis Glencross, Antoine Vermette

    To Arz: Teuvo Teravainen, Sven Baertschi, Karri Ramo

  • Rockmorton65

    The Flames should be looking to buy a #4 d-man that is better than Wideman. The benefit of getting into the playoffs for the development of Monahan and Johnny Hockey is worth more than the assets it should cost to get a defensive d-man for the second pair even if they have to overpay a bit.

  • everton fc

    I’d hate to see Baertschi go before he gets a full season. Would hate to see Backlund go, as well. But the team was winning without both players. Yet, they are also both young.

  • acg5151

    If the Flames are smart they sell high on some of their assets like Dennis Wideman if possible. Curtis Glencross is going to get dumped one way or the other, some team will want him for a playoff push because he has the grits.

    Who knows what Brad Treliving is going to do? Every time I think he is going to do something he does something different, so we will see.

  • acg5151

    If we trade Wideman we wont make the playoffs. He is a huge part of our PP and PK, BT will only move him if we have a horrible brier road trip and are well out of making the playoffs.