Slack New Year’s: How about a trade?

The Calgary Flames haven’t been getting results. Under the surface, things seem to be okay, but they just aren’t scoring goals. Unsurprisingly, that has led to a lack of wins.

There are ways to fix this. The most obvious one is going to be “fire the coach!!” but, beyond that, there’s always the possibility of a trade. Rumours have been swirling around a number of players, including guys like Anthony Duclair and Mike Hoffman. Prior to the New Year’s Even game against Chicago, we sat down and hashed out some thoughts on the logistics of the Flames making a trade.

arii (Ari Yanover): So, who do the Flames have who has trade value, who might they actually be okay parting ways with? I think Stone is the common refrain here, especially when hoping to find a spot for Andersson in the lineup, but is there any movement possibility in the forward group?

Ryan Pike: I’d probably say: Ferland, Frolik (for the right price), Hathaway (for the right price), maybe some of their AHL kids?

ctibs (Christian Tiberi): If i was another GM, I’d be interested in Stone. But that contract scares me away.

Ryan Pike: I could see Flames moving Stone for somebody else’s iffy bottom-six contract and a pick, and then waiving said bottom-sixer. The Lack deals screams to me that they want to open up spots to challenge guys.

ctibs: Don’t think that holds for Stone. I get the impression that they actually like him. Of course, he seems to be the easiest to move.

arii: You can like someone and still want to move him because you may like someone else more (i.e. “We want to build depth in case Rasmus isn’t ready– oh crap, he’s ready”).

Mike Pfeil (Mike FAIL): The two things going for a potential Stone trade are the number of teams needing a RHD and “hockey men” valuing Stone’s play.

ctibs: I think that’s a local phenomenon though. Don’t hear much from other markets.

Ryan Pike: Rebuttal: Stone seems to be one of the few guys with a high “give a crap” meter, and moving him seems counter-productive if they’re making moves for Prout with that in mind, too.

Mike Pfeil: I thought Troy Brouwer was brought in for leadership and to reinforce that “give a crap” culture. But to Ryan’s point, trading Stone and waiving the guy in return isn’t a bad idea either.

Ryan Pike: They’ve shown a willingness to be creative before (with the first Lack deal).

Mike Pfeil: You don’t see many deals like that either – maybe we get a second three-way deal this season? Buffalo, Ottawa, Vegas, and Pittsburgh all need a RHD.

ctibs: Vegas has Deryk Engelland. What else do they need?

Ryan Pike: The grittiest, most leaderiest hockey man there ever was.

arii: Well there have been a number of players rumoured on the trade block… almost everyone out of Buffalo, Hoffman… (And Duclair and Pacioretty, though those are different teams.)

Ryan Pike: Treliving and Derek MacKinnon have reportedly scouted a lot of Buffalo and Ottawa games.

arii: Is Buffalo re-rebuilding? While Ottawa is just straight up imploding.

Ryan Pike: I think Buffalo is going full Oilers.

arii: But Jack Hughes is only 16.

Mike Pfeil: GM/Coach/Captain Jack Eichel will wait if he has to.

ctibs: Who, realistically from that list of teams, intrigues you?

Mike Pfeil: Teams or players?

Ryan Pike: Are we talking moving bodies to open up spots, or moving bodies to upgrade?

ctibs: Players from those teams you listed. I guess it could work both ways. With Brad’s trade history, I think they don’t pull the trigger unless they have some sort of NHL gain. … I don’t think Vegas wants to help out a rival when they lead the division.

arii: Does Vegas stick with what they have? Do they add at the deadline?

ctibs: I think they’re going to just to keep the hype rolling. Would probably be one hell of a narrative rollercoaster to be the best expansion team ever in all of sports and then fire sale. Though I would like a Jonathan Marchessault.

Mike Pfeil: Even Reilly Smith for Stone is a deal that could work.

ctibs: Ex-computer boys, come to Calgary.

Ryan Pike: But they’d still need to move out a forward.

ctibs: Lazar’s shiny smile will blend in with Vegas.

Ryan Pike: Bright lights, bright smiles.

Mike Pfeil: They also could waive Lazar finally admitting that the deal was dumb but that’s a topic for another day. [ed. – It sure is!]

ctibs: I don’t think it would be an admission of being dumb, just that they think he needs playing time.

arii: I mean that’s how they shipped Lack out. It’s a nice way of saying “we might have been wrong here.” And they got to ship Lack out because it turned out they had a ready internal replacement. Lazar is already being regularly healthy scratched, they don’t need a replacement for him at all.

ctibs: I feel the Sven experience has led them to be nicer to young guys who are struggling in the NHL. Like they may say “well he’s not all here yet” instead of “see ya never”.

Mike Pfeil: I’ve been beating this drum in here and other DMs lately of Stone + Bennett/Ferland + [something?] for Hoffman. It hypothetically works from a dollars perspective, freeing up a forward, and dumping Stone off with his brother.

arii: That deal for Ottawa does shed salary in that they get two players for roughly the same price.

Mike Pfeil: Unless the other option is get Mark Stone

arii: Stone for Stone eh?

Ryan Pike: Imagine breaking that trade to the boys.

ctibs: They both text each other at the exact same time saying “I’m going to play for your team bro!”

Mike Pfeil: Tell me if I’m wrong: is it stomach-friendly to keep Michael Stone if you can move other pieces for Mark Stone…?

arii: Depends what the other pieces are.

ctibs: If Ottawa wants a RHD and you can’t move Stone, that’s either Hamonic or Hamilton. Immediate no for Hamilton. If it’s Hamonic moving, that’s the Brodie/Stone pairing which ehhh.

Mike Pfeil: Unless Rasmus comes in!

arii: They’re still scratching Kulak for Bartkowski on occasion, they’re not gonna put Rasmus in the top four.

Mike Pfeil: The dream has died.

Ryan Pike: I’m curious what they do, and how much Brad will be willing to blow up the room a bit.

arii: What about a smaller tweak, i.e. going after Duclair? Treliving likes to trade with Arizona.

ctibs: I want Duclair. Who is Bradley willing to blow up? The people who departed the Flames under his tenure are either rental pieces or pieces of little consequence, and the only ones who fall under that are Stajan and Brouwer, who no one is really going to want to take. … (Side note: oh how wonderful it would be if that Brouwer-Blues trade went through at the beginning of the year.)

Mike Pfeil: I would have bought us a cake and we could have celebrated.

arii: Well he scored some goals so there’s hope now right? … Right?

Ryan Pike: BrouwerPlay Forever

ctibs: Points-wise, before the New Year’s Eve game, the Brouwer-Lazar connection has been more effective recently than the Gaudreau-Monahan connection and the Bennett-Jankowski connection. what is this team

How about you guys? Is there anyone you really want to trade for who’s rumoured to be on the block? Any teams you’d like to target? Any deals you think could realistically get done, whether it’s for an immediate upgrade or to open up a spot for a prospect? Sound off in the comments – what better way to welcome in a new year than musing on new possibilities?