Skinnyjimmy08
WorldTraveler
- Mar 30, 2012
- 22,512
- 11,988
Flames aren't moving Tkachuk in order to get Hoffman... unsure why the idea is even being entertained
Eklund Rumor: Hoffman to CGY
- Thread starter Kresco
- Start date
Johnny Hoxville
The Return of a Legend
Your post has absolutely zero logic to it. Tkachuk has superior size, strength, and physical ability. While Hoffman is a very good proven goalscorer and a better skater, Calgary has a greater need for Tkachuk for the reasons I mentioned. We already had Hudler and let him go because we have other needs.
I'm not sure what time travelling has to do with anything, but you do you.
Slush
Registered User
Some of these trade offers people are throwing out there for Hoffman.. just laughable.
We have to remember that this is Eklund reporting the rumor. It's never going to happen.
We have to remember that this is Eklund reporting the rumor. It's never going to happen.
Sting
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2004
- 7,917
- 2,918
Size, strength and physical ability aren't typically attributes you use when talking about "intangibles". At least, where I come from. Generally, those are mental things or off-ice characteristics like leadership.
I agree Tkachuk is more of a need for Calgary when you have guys like Bennett likely in a top 6 role as well.
Johnny Hoxville
The Return of a Legend
Skilled players are generally not referred to as having intangibles. Playing a physical, gritty, role for your team is. Agreed on leadership, and things like being a good PK'er, but intangibles covers several areas of a players attributes. Regardless, that's irrelevant. If we can agree that Tkachuk is more of a need for the Flames, then I can hope that you would see my point about wanting the 1st. It would be like Stone (while being more proven than Tkachuk), having much more value than an equivalent producing player who lacks what he brings.
Nac Mac Feegle
wee & free
- Jun 10, 2011
- 34,900
- 9,314
....a completely unproven 18-year-old. Kind could turn into another Yakupov for all we know.
You don't give away a 30-goal guy who is on the right side of 30 for a package where the main asset hasn't played an NHL game. Maybe on HF boards you do, but not in the real world.
OvermanKingGainer
#BennettFreed #CurseofTheSpulll #FreeOliver
Wingers ranked top 4 by TSN's draft rankings in the past ten years:
Phil Kessel
Patrick Kane
James Van Riemsdyk
Evander Kane
Taylor Hall
Jonathan Huberdeau
Gabriel Landeskog
Nail Yakupov
Filip Forsberg
Jonathan Drouin
Mitchell Marner
--------------------
Patrik Laine
Jesse Puljujarvi
Matthew Tkachuk
... while the chance of a Yakupov or Kane exists*, it's not much higher than the chance of Hoffman never again having a 29 goal season. To use Tkachuk's status as a prospect as a devaluation tool is pretty shoddy logic considering his ceiling blows Hoffman out of the water and his floor is still pretty much a good middle-sixer-line-fixer. The odds are with Tkachuk, not Hoffman, to be the better player in two years. That's not even factoring in that Hoffman is eight years older.
*on paper. In actuality Tkachuk's hockey sense blows both those players away.
This type of trades are more common than you think.
Flames traded Joe Nieuwendyk twice the player Hoffman will ever be for a kid named Iginla.
The kid for Hoff is a terrible trade for Flames.
Lunatik
Registered User
- Oct 12, 2012
- 56,248
- 8,384
The Flames are a rebuilding team, the suggestion they will trade their recent 6th overall pick and/or a potential top 10 pick is nothing short of laughable and devoid of reality. Maybe Hoffman has that kind of value in a vacuum, although I highly doubt any team will overpay for a soft scoring winger. But even if someone out there might, the Flames are not in a position to give up picks/prospects unless they are later picks or depth prospects; so this is all moot and people should just let this "rumor" die.
What do you think OTT would want and what do you think CGY would realistically give up for him? I mean OTT's GM has already come out and said he thinks the time is now to make a push, and it's not like CGY is loaded with young NHL talent that they could/would move for Hoffman. So if futures are out of the question (as is likely given what OTT has done this year), then yeah, CGY likely doesn't have what it would take to get a deal done for Hoffman.
Snazu
I contribute nothing
- Feb 2, 2007
- 632
- 128
Any time the Flames are linked to a trade rumor, I take it with a grain of salt. I have no doubt that Treliving has asked about Hoffman, but he leaves no stone unturned when it comes to checking on players availability and see what Ottawa thinks he's worth. That's how he swung the Hamilton trade when a lot of GM's didn't even know that he was available. I'm sure if there was a thread for every time Treliving inquired about a player, this whole trade rumor board would be full of the Flames being linked to a player.
OTT doesn't need Gio, Brodie or Hamilton. And CGY obviously isn't going to trade Gaudreau or Monahan for Hoffman. Which doesn't leave a lot of options.
edguy
Registered User
Idk about you but any one of those 3 turn our Defense into Elite calliber immediately. Would have to happen after expansion draft though
Ainsy01
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2014
- 1,187
- 627
I love it ! i have mentioned this is a post of mine recently, purely as a " i wish " thread about bringing another LW to CGY. I think it was palat, landeskog and hoffman.
Ottawa seems to be trying to get better now, (brassard for ziban) sooo, with that being said, there isnt too much we can offer them.
Too bad a 76 point hudler and a 56 point wideman werent still around.
Uhm... Lets offer... nothing. We have nothing to offer the sens for Hoffman. Absolutely nothing. Picks and high end prospects are all we have to offer, and thats exactly what cannot afford to move. Wideman is our only vet on the way out and his value is a 3rd to a playoff team come deadline. Too bad, I would love to see this happen.
We could offer, Ferland, Klimchuk and a first in 2017 (Sens pray we finish bottom 5 again) we pray we make the playoffs. That risk is the ONLY reason the sens would bite, and like I said previous, they seem to want to win now. Too bad
Ottawa seems to be trying to get better now, (brassard for ziban) sooo, with that being said, there isnt too much we can offer them.
Too bad a 76 point hudler and a 56 point wideman werent still around.
Uhm... Lets offer... nothing. We have nothing to offer the sens for Hoffman. Absolutely nothing. Picks and high end prospects are all we have to offer, and thats exactly what cannot afford to move. Wideman is our only vet on the way out and his value is a 3rd to a playoff team come deadline. Too bad, I would love to see this happen.
We could offer, Ferland, Klimchuk and a first in 2017 (Sens pray we finish bottom 5 again) we pray we make the playoffs. That risk is the ONLY reason the sens would bite, and like I said previous, they seem to want to win now. Too bad
Johnny Hoxville
The Return of a Legend
That's true, but a comment was made saying Calgary doesn't have the assets to land Hoffman, which is false. That was the purpose of my post. Now whether or not those assets would be on the table is another debate.
I think if Calgary offered Frolik and our 1st next season that a deal would be close.
MC Ride
Feels bad man
- Feb 4, 2009
- 2,544
- 0
Today I learned that a top 4 rated prospect is just a "Magic Bean" whilst someone who's never actually scored 30 is a "30 goal scorer"
Why top 4? Why not wingers ranked from spots 4-7? Tkachuk is ranked 4th, not 1st, 2nd, or 3rd so you seem to be greatly biasing the argument here.
All criticism aside, id love to see the list you just posted but for spots 4-7... Somehow I bet it doesn't look so hot.
EDIT: Since I don't think you'll respond, here you go:
Mitch Marner
Lawson Crouse
Leon Draisaitl
Michael Dal Colle
Nick Ritchie
Jake Virtanen
Valeri Nichushkin
Teuvo Teravainen
Nino Niederreiter
Mikkel Boedker
Alex Cherepanov
Bobby Ryan
Pretty different looking list, isn't it? The only one who has a > 50% chance to be better than Hoffman at some point in their career - in my opinion - is Draisaitl. You could argue Ryan was at some point better than Hoffman...I'm not really sure if he was or not though since I obviously didn't really watch him in Anaheim. He certainly isn't better than Hoffman now though, and it's not as though he's aged particularly poorly.
Last edited:
Did you just use a trade from 1995 to demonstrate how common these types of trades are? Mmkay
BondraTime
Registered User
Ha. Yes and no. I'm just discovering the main boards and realized that there's a whole host of Eklund Rumour threads. I figured I'd check one out, then laughed when I saw that post. So, yes, I posted on a months old thread, but no, my intention wasn't to go in to call someone out. I just saw it and replied.
