Proposal: Flames / Preds

[Johnny Hoxville]

To: Nashville

Sam Bennett
Michael Frolik (2 million retention)

To: Calgary

Mikael Granlund
3rd Round Pick

Click to read more...

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Definitely worth considering. I'm not sure getting more Forwards will turn out to be our biggest need, but Bennett is interesting to bring a little more grit and energy maybe and return us a retainable younger asset to recoup somewhat on the loss of Fiala.

I still think the Preds are probably going to be patient with Granlund though. He probably has another month or two to see if he can get untracked here first.

 

[DingDongCharlie]

Why would Calgary do this? I mean it’s great if they did as an Oil fan

 

[Taytro]

I wouldn't do this if I'm Calgary. Seems like a pretty blatant downgrade and treats Frolik as a bigger cap dump than he is.

 

[YP44]

counter: Frolik + cond 2nd (performance based) for Toffoli

 

[Soundgarden]

As far as gaining cap space goes, it's alright, but I'd rather gamble on Granlund regaining his form, we've already got plenty of Frolik and Bennett caliber bottom sixers.

 

[Iggys Dome]

I’d do it. Bennett is great for energy and grit but it’s clear this core needs a shake up.

 

[TheUltimateOiler]

Sam Bennett needs to workout hard , get as strong as a ox and become a Kassian type player.

 

[DecadeofDarkness22]

owner is too cheap to retain anything on any player, when was the last time they did?

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

owner is too cheap to retain anything on any player, when was the last time they did?

Dollars in and dollars out is almost the same, the Cap has nothing to do with it as Frolik and Granlund are both FA’s at the end of this season.

This deal has the Flames hopefully gaining a top 6 asset and the Preds get a younger player with upside as a return for Granlund.

 

[FameFlame069]

Dollars in and dollars out is almost the same, the Cap has nothing to do with it as Frolik and Granlund are both FA’s at the end of this season.

This deal has the Flames hopefully gaining a top 6 asset and the Preds get a younger player with upside as a return for Granlund.

He never mentioned anything about dollars in/out, just the ownership has a "no need to retain policy" go back through all of Calgary's trades and look for yourself, go ahead and Google it and there might be articles of back in 07-11 where its been leaked that Calgary will not retain

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

He never mentioned anything about dollars in/out, just the ownership has a "no need to retain policy" go back through all of Calgary's trades and look for yourself, go ahead and Google it and there might be articles of back in 07-11 where its been leaked that Calgary will not retain

This is a myth. Honestly it goes back to Feaster when he had to run everything by ownership before doing any kind of transactions, which is where this started. Once Burke came into the picture, they talked about taking a “bad” contract to get a 1st round pick. Also another rumour was that ownership wouldn’t buy players out, well that was proven wrong how many times now? That doesn’t exactly sound to me like an ownership that is cheap.

What we have heard over and over is that our ownership will do whatever it takes to have a competitive roster that can make the playoffs.

 

[FameFlame069]

This is a myth. Honestly it goes back to Feaster when he had to run everything by ownership before doing any kind of transactions, which is where this started. Once Burke came into the picture, they talked about taking a “bad” contract to get a 1st round pick. Also another rumour was that ownership wouldn’t buy players out, well that was proven wrong how many times now? That doesn’t exactly sound to me like an ownership that is cheap.

What we have heard over and over is that our ownership will do whatever it takes to have a competitive roster that can make the playoffs.

But still... 0 retention on our players have been done, i never said our owners were cheap, taking a bad contract for a 1st is smart asset management that isn't retention on our players, i never mentioned anything to do with buyouts either, so nothing on retention? Case closed. Your argument is invalid, lawyer wins.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

But still... 0 retention on our players have been done, i never said our owners were cheap, taking a bad contract for a 1st is smart asset management that isn't retention on our players, i never mentioned anything to do with buyouts either, so nothing on retention? Case closed. Your argument is invalid, lawyer wins.

A delusional lawyer? I mean, buying out a player and then paying him not to play for your team and retention on a player in trade, is also paying him not to play for your team. It’s very close to the same thing. Retention likely hasn’t been done by the Flames because of opportunity, not because of policy.

 

[FameFlame069]

A delusional lawyer? I mean, buying out a player and then paying him not to play for your team and retention on a player in trade, is also paying him not to play for your team. It’s very close to the same thing. Retention likely hasn’t been done by the Flames because of opportunity, not because of policy.

... I'm a real life lawyer, but thanks for calling me delusional, and if you want to put it in other words like "paying someone to play for another team" ill put it this way,retention on a player is used to get a better return than you would normally, Calgary was asked to retain on Iggy, but they didn't, they were asked to retain on Dion P. But didn't, a buy out is to pay someone not to play for your team anymore which is usually because that player has been falling off a cliff or what not, you really want to get into this? Because I'll make that 19 year old mouth of yours shut in an instant, plus i don't think this is a smart route for the Flames Granlund is just as much a cap dump as Frolik is, so it'd be Nashville retaining to equal cap hits, because Frolik is only owed 3M therefore his contract is still better than Granlund, i also think Minnesota got a good deal because Granlund isn't returning to his past self. So counter Frolik + 3rd for Granlund(800K retained) + 5th

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

... I'm a real life lawyer, but thanks for calling me delusional, and if you want to put it in other words like "paying someone to play for another team" ill put it this way,retention on a player is used to get a better return than you would normally, Calgary was asked to retain on Iggy, but they didn't, they were asked to retain on Dion P. But didn't, a buy out is to pay someone not to play for your team anymore which is usually because that player has been falling off a cliff or what not, you really want to get into this? Because I'll make that 19 year old mouth of yours shut in an instant, plus i don't think this is a smart route for the Flames Granlund is just as much a cap dump as Frolik is, so it'd be Nashville retaining to equal cap hits, because Frolik is only owed 3M therefore his contract is still better than Granlund, i also think Minnesota got a good deal because Granlund isn't returning to his past self. So counter Frolik + 3rd for Granlund(800K retained) + 5th

You’re right that retention is used to get a better return on a player, which a far better scenario than buying a player out. Thanks for proving my point.

Also feel free to post the links that the Flames were asked to retain on those players. First I’ve heard of it.

And thanks for calling me 19, I’m recently divorced and love when people call me young.

 

[FameFlame069]

You’re right that retention is used to get a better return on a player, which a far better scenario than buying a player out. Thanks for proving my point.

Also feel free to post the links that the Flames were asked to retain on those players. First I’ve heard of it.

And thanks for calling me 19, I’m recently divorced and love when people call me young.

Oh i looked for them, all i know is the day Iggy was traded away there were more than two articles talking about Calgary ownership denying any form of retention on him, and that they didn't want to pay their star to not ay for them. Secondly its Toronto im sure they were trying to get the Isles to retain on Johnny T's contract (yes ik he signed as a UFA) like i said go ahead and show me once that Calgary retained on anyone even if its 200K it counts, yet you tried changing words which i showed you i could do the same, Calgary will not RETAIN and until the day it happens i will believe the reporters who speak to the management over some kid on the internet, divorcing your dog doesn't count, but good luck hopefully you don't lose half of your shit

 

[treple13]

Pass from Calgary. I think we need to keep depth, so I'd rather not give up two pieces here for just one. Not sure Granlund is the right fit either

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

Oh i looked for them, all i know is the day Iggy was traded away there were more than two articles talking about Calgary ownership denying any form of retention on him, and that they didn't want to pay their star to not ay for them. Secondly its Toronto im sure they were trying to get the Isles to retain on Johnny T's contract (yes ik he signed as a UFA) like i said go ahead and show me once that Calgary retained on anyone even if its 200K it counts, yet you tried changing words which i showed you i could do the same, Calgary will not RETAIN and until the day it happens i will believe the reporters who speak to the management over some kid on the internet, divorcing your dog doesn't count, but good luck hopefully you don't lose half of your ****

For being a lawyer, you’re sure having a hard time providing any sort of evidence.

 

[DFF]

Sam Bennett needs to workout hard , get as strong as a ox and become a Kassian type player.

He doesnt need to work hard to go backward.

 

[super6646]

For being a lawyer, you’re sure having a hard time providing any sort of evidence.

People can lie... it is the internet after all.

Also hockey gets people emotional. I've had to learn to calm that part of me at times lol.

 

[TheUltimateOiler]

He doesnt need to work hard to go backward.

You would rather have Bennett than Kassian? I suppose you were one of those people that would rather have Bennett over draisaitl too? Lol

 

[crowi]

For being a lawyer, you’re sure having a hard time providing any sort of evidence.

At this point I think those who claim to be lawyers are same as other trash attempts.

 

[crowi]

Oh i looked for them, all i know is the day Iggy was traded away there were more than two articles talking about Calgary ownership denying any form of retention on him, and that they didn't want to pay their star to not ay for them. Secondly its Toronto im sure they were trying to get the Isles to retain on Johnny T's contract (yes ik he signed as a UFA) like i said go ahead and show me once that Calgary retained on anyone even if its 200K it counts, yet you tried changing words which i showed you i could do the same, Calgary will not RETAIN and until the day it happens i will believe the reporters who speak to the management over some kid on the internet, divorcing your dog doesn't count, but good luck hopefully you don't lose half of your ****

Imagine saying so much and no one caring at all.
People who actually are here, consider your bullshit amount of thought as a bad thing.

 

[Outofbodyinhungary]

No thanks. Value isn’t bad, but I’d rather look for a powerforward if we were trading granlund. If Bennett grows 3-4 inches than maybe were in business