Value of: Jimmy Howard to CGY

[TCNorthstars]

Oh so Detroit takes back Stone and Smith? Good to go with a four for one.

Sure Wings will take Smith, but if Stone rides along you are taking Ericsson.

 

[FameFlame069]

Sure Wings will take Smith, but if Stone rides along you are taking Ericsson.

Well the poster(not sure if it was you) asked for a 2nd and 3rd for Howard which is way to high of a price for a 30+ year old declining starting goalie, if he was younger like 25 i would cough up a 1st(Jones/Andersen), if Det wants two high-ish(top 100's) then they better be taking back Stone, and Smith is obvious because we are not carrying 3 goalies for the rest of the year, im fine with 3rd + Smith + something like a 4th/C prospect, but anything higher than that and i'll walk away with Rittich

 

[justafan22]

Well the poster(not sure if it was you) asked for a 2nd and 3rd for Howard which is way to high of a price for a 30+ year old declining starting goalie, if he was younger like 25 i would cough up a 1st(Jones/Andersen), if Det wants two high-ish(top 100's) then they better be taking back Stone, and Smith is obvious because we are not carrying 3 goalies for the rest of the year, im fine with 3rd + Smith + something like a 4th/C prospect, but anything higher than that and i'll walk away with Rittich

Smith got a conditional 2nd (turned into a 3rd), and Hickey with one year left in smith.

2nd + meh prospect or 3rd + decent prospect should be the price

 

[FMichael]

The Flames don't need to give to anything substantial to acquire aging backup goalies.

How about a 'quality' aging back up goalie?

 

[FameFlame069]

Smith got a conditional 2nd (turned into a 3rd), and Hickey with one year left in smith.

2nd + meh prospect or 3rd + decent prospect should be the price

guessing you forgot two things, Ari retained and we just placed a goalie on week-week like 2 days before the trade

 

[SirloinUB]

It sounds like Flames fans don't want Howard. That's fine; I'm sure Holland will be happy to resign him.

 

[TCNorthstars]

Well the poster(not sure if it was you) asked for a 2nd and 3rd for Howard which is way to high of a price for a 30+ year old declining starting goalie, if he was younger like 25 i would cough up a 1st(Jones/Andersen), if Det wants two high-ish(top 100's) then they better be taking back Stone, and Smith is obvious because we are not carrying 3 goalies for the rest of the year, im fine with 3rd + Smith + something like a 4th/C prospect, but anything higher than that and i'll walk away with Rittich

Those picks certainly aren't really highish. The late second rounder has a 33% chance of being an NHL player while the late 3rd has a 24% chance. How is Howard declining?

 

[Lunatik]

Smith got a conditional 2nd (turned into a 3rd), and Hickey with one year left in smith.

2nd + meh prospect or 3rd + decent prospect should be the price

2 things.

1. Arizona retained on Smith, not for a couple months, but a couple years.
2. Smith had 2 years remaining on his deal. he wasn't a rental.

 

[Iggys Dome]

Moving our first for Howard just screams first round exit, he’s not gonna be a difference maker in the playoffs, and we’re not gonna resign him. Only way we move him is if it’s smith+ a pick or prospect ( b or c level) for Howard, no firsts or blue chips, which Detroit doesn’t seem interested in doing. No deal to be made here IMO.

 

[RedMenace]

I'd do Howard for Smith + 2019 3rd + 2020 2nd.

Maybe add a later pick from the Wings.

I guess everyone either glossed over this, or it was way too reasonable, I don't really know which. A first round pick, for which is what Holland is "asking," likely isn't happening, and I think he'd probably "settle" on something a bit more reasonable.

I don't know who's asking for high-level prospects or any of that... wonder if I've blocked them.

 

[FameFlame069]

I guess everyone either glossed over this, or it was way too reasonable, I don't really know which. A first round pick, for which is what Holland is "asking," likely isn't happening, and I think he'd probably "settle" on something a bit more reasonable.

I don't know who's asking for high-level prospects or any of that... wonder if I've blocked them.

if we're giving up a 2nd and 3rd, add Stone, because we're low on quality picks(top 3 rounds) and our cupboards will dry up quickly

 

[RedMenace]

if we're giving up a 2nd and 3rd, add Stone, because we're low on quality picks(top 3 rounds) and our cupboards will dry up quickly

That would be a tough sell because A) he's on IR, 2) he's got a modified NTC (according to CapFriendly), and $) he's got another year left at $3.5m. If Calgary retained a bit on him, there might be something to be had there (enough that putting him through waivers would eat most of the cap hit if he's terrible).

Don't forget the 2nd is 2020 and the 3rd is 2019... and damn, the more I look at the situation, the harder it is to wrap my tiny brain around. Just for grins:


Michael Stone (50% retained)
Mike Smith
2019 3rd
2020 2nd

for


Jimmy Howard
2019 5th

Justification: Calgary wants a shot this year; Howard +1 pick for Smith + 2 picks and Stone because Calgary wants to shed him? His contract? Regardless, Detroit would be doing Calgary a "favor."

I don't know, it's why I'm not an NHL GM.

 

[FameFlame069]

That would be a tough sell because A) he's on IR, 2) he's got a modified NTC (according to CapFriendly), and $) he's got another year left at $3.5m. If Calgary retained a bit on him, there might be something to be had there (enough that putting him through waivers would eat most of the cap hit if he's terrible).

Don't forget the 2nd is 2020 and the 3rd is 2019... and damn, the more I look at the situation, the harder it is to wrap my tiny brain around. Just for grins:


Michael Stone (50% retained)
Mike Smith
2019 3rd
2020 2nd

for


Jimmy Howard
2019 5th

Justification: Calgary wants a shot this year; Howard +1 pick for Smith + 2 picks and Stone because Calgary wants to shed him? His contract? Regardless, Detroit would be doing Calgary a "favor."

I don't know, it's why I'm not an NHL GM.

If we're keeping half his cap hit might as well just do a simpler trade cause theres no way we do this one

Stone(50%) + Smith + 2nd 19/20(if we make the playoffs we keep this years pick with the Isles trade) for Howard(50%) + 5th 19/20(same year as the 2nd)

the reason i put Stone in there is because theres more back up goalies on the market rather than teams needing a goalie(Cgy, Car, Phi?) theres at least 5 back ups up for trade whether if a couple are on these teams or not, i'd much rather go back to Elliot and give up Smith + 5th for him rather than paying a 2nd + Smith + for Howard

*correction about the 2nd to Isles, it was the 2018 year the pick was conditioned on so ignore that point, it would be 2020, so lets add a 4th(highest one) on the Flames side*

 

[Petes2424]

That would be a tough sell because A) he's on IR, 2) he's got a modified NTC (according to CapFriendly), and $) he's got another year left at $3.5m. If Calgary retained a bit on him, there might be something to be had there (enough that putting him through waivers would eat most of the cap hit if he's terrible).

Don't forget the 2nd is 2020 and the 3rd is 2019... and damn, the more I look at the situation, the harder it is to wrap my tiny brain around. Just for grins:


Michael Stone (50% retained)
Mike Smith
2019 3rd
2020 2nd

for


Jimmy Howard
2019 5th

Justification: Calgary wants a shot this year; Howard +1 pick for Smith + 2 picks and Stone because Calgary wants to shed him? His contract? Regardless, Detroit would be doing Calgary a "favor."

I don't know, it's why I'm not an NHL GM.

That’s probably fair for Howard. The Wings can turn Stone to someone else at that point for another pick, ASSUMING this blood clot isn’t something long term. Do we know?? You don’t mess with blood clots. Anyways, fair deal imo.

It would be a shame for the Flames having a great year if they don’t address the net and Rittich declines more. We’ve seen it 100 times with goalies coming out of nowhere for 1/2 a season or even a full season and then right back to where they came.

 

[Hobnobs]

That’s probably fair for Howard. The Wings can turn Stone to someone else at that point for another pick, ASSUMING this blood clot isn’t something long term. Do we know?? You don’t mess with blood clots. Anyways, fair deal imo.

It would be a shame for the Flames having a great year if they don’t address the net and Rittich declines more. We’ve seen it 100 times with goalies coming out of nowhere for 1/2 a season or even a full season and then right back to where they came.

Flip him to the Jets for a 3rd to entice his brother to sign there long term

 

[RedMenace]

If we're keeping half his cap hit might as well just do a simpler trade cause theres no way we do this one

Stone(50%) + Smith + 2nd 19/20(if we make the playoffs we keep this years pick with the Isles trade) for Howard(50%) + 5th 19/20(same year as the 2nd)

the reason i put Stone in there is because theres more back up goalies on the market rather than teams needing a goalie(Cgy, Car, Phi?) theres at least 5 back ups up for trade whether if a couple are on these teams or not, i'd much rather go back to Elliot and give up Smith + 5th for him rather than paying a 2nd + Smith + for Howard

*correction about the 2nd to Isles, it was the 2018 year the pick was conditioned on so ignore that point, it would be 2020, so lets add a 4th(highest one) on the Flames side*

I agree, it does get a little convoluted when trying to make it fair for both sides, and I just tossed in 50% as a number that was a thing; it could absolutely be lower, I'm sure.

Seems like there might be a base there, but it'll take someone smarter than me to sort it out.

It would be a shame for the Flames having a great year if they don’t address the net and Rittich declines more. We’ve seen it 100 times with goalies coming out of nowhere for 1/2 a season or even a full season and then right back to where they came.

That's the thing I'm trying to solve for Calgary while keeping it reasonable. It may not seem like it, but Calgary is my favorite Western team, so I'd like to see them do well.

 

[FameFlame069]

I agree, it does get a little convoluted when trying to make it fair for both sides, and I just tossed in 50% as a number that was a thing; it could absolutely be lower, I'm sure.

Seems like there might be a base there, but it'll take someone smarter than me to sort it out.



That's the thing I'm trying to solve for Calgary while keeping it reasonable. It may not seem like it, but Calgary is my favorite Western team, so I'd like to see them do well.

well what do you think of the 2nd 20 + 4th 19 + Stone(at 2M) and Smith
for Howard(at 50%) + 5th in 19

 

[Goalie guy]

It was talked about last night after the Wings game on the radio show, he want's to come back stay here. He understands the teams needs picks and understands teams "IE" Flames need a goalie. no retention on price 2nd rd pick playoff goalie on a good year with a bad D in front of him. See how far the Flames go and he comes back to Detroit in the off season.

 

[DFF]

It was talked about last night after the Wings game on the radio show, he want's to come back stay here. He understands the teams needs picks and understands teams "IE" Flames need a goalie. no retention on price 2nd rd pick playoff goalie on a good year with a bad D in front of him. See how far the Flames go and he comes back to Detroit in the off season.

2nd is worth a gamble

 

[golffuul]

Any chance of ditching the picks for a D prospect? Perhaps a Kylington?

 

[HighLifeMan]

Any chance of ditching the picks for a D prospect? Perhaps a Kylington?

Kylington has considerably more value than a mid to late second round pick. I don't think it's a realistic ask.

 

[golffuul]

Kylington has considerably more value than a mid to late second round pick. I don't think it's a realistic ask.

But the consideration, thus far, has been a 2nd and 3rd pick. Might be willing to add a mid round pick going back to Calgary.

 

[Sparky93]

Any chance of ditching the picks for a D prospect? Perhaps a Kylington?

It’s about as realistic as getting anything from the Flames. Basically, if Treliving decides that the goaltending that got us there, isn’t good enough to take us anywhere in the playoffs, he’ll be spending the picks on a long term solution in the offseason, not wasting them on 25 games of 35 year old, Jimmy Howard.

 

[FameFlame069]

Any chance of ditching the picks for a D prospect? Perhaps a Kylington?

Is Nyquist coming with 50%?

 

[HighLifeMan]

But the consideration, thus far, has been a 2nd and 3rd pick. Might be willing to add a mid round pick going back to Calgary.

Young, contributing, cost controlled NHL talent >> Mid round draft picks.

Howard makes some sense for Calgary, but not at the expense of Kylington. The goalie market has always been and will continue to be stale. Detroit should be very happy with a 2nd round pick for Howard when all signs point to him returning in the off-season.