Todd Cordell: Could the Calgary Flames and Anaheim Ducks become trade partners?

Why the hell did they make that Lazar trade. They're going to end up losing Ferland to expansion because Lazar will be protected.

Why the hell did they make that Lazar trade. They're going to end up losing Ferland to expansion because Lazar will be protected.
- flamminghead

I think they made the lazar trade to give them more depth in case they lost someone they didn't want to ....I don't think they protect lazar over Ferland either

I think they made the lazar trade to give them more depth in case they lost someone they didn't want to ....I don't think they protect lazar over Ferland either
- Redmile247

Is it crazy to expose Frolik? I can't imagine them not protecting Lazar since they just gave up a second rounder. With that assumption you have to choose between protecting Frolik or Ferland. I honestly would protect Ferland. If you loose Frolik they at least gain more cap room.

Move along, nothing to see here. If CGY makes this deal, then we are now in the situation we just rescued ANA from. That top 4 looks great but at the cost of Bennett (to ANA) and, likely, Ferland (to expansion). It's not worth it. If anything, I'd rather we trade for a legit RW that we can and would protect but would have to expose Lazar or include him in a deal. But, that cost of a 2nd rounder + to get a legit top 6 RW is the only thing that would make sense and be worth it.

Is it crazy to expose Frolik? I can't imagine them not protecting Lazar since they just gave up a second rounder. With that assumption you have to choose between protecting Frolik or Ferland. I honestly would protect Ferland. If you loose Frolik they at least gain more cap room.
- flamminghead

I agree and Ferly is younger and still finding his game and potential.

Is it crazy to expose Frolik? I can't imagine them not protecting Lazar since they just gave up a second rounder. With that assumption you have to choose between protecting Frolik or Ferland. I honestly would protect Ferland. If you loose Frolik they at least gain more cap room.
- flamminghead

Maybe the flames asked vegas what the cost was to not take someone who was left exposed and it was better value to spend a second and add another player ...everyone thought kulak was going to be the guy vegas took but now it's a forward ...things change

Move along, nothing to see here. If CGY makes this deal, then we are now in the situation we just rescued ANA from. That top 4 looks great but at the cost of Bennett (to ANA) and, likely, Ferland (to expansion). It's not worth it. If anything, I'd rather we trade for a legit RW that we can and would protect but would have to expose Lazar or include him in a deal. But, that cost of a 2nd rounder + to get a legit top 6 RW is the only thing that would make sense and be worth it.
- TandA4Flames

Yeah it just doesn't make any sense for the flames to do the deal before the expansion draft and makes less sense for Anaheim to do it after

I agree and Ferly is younger and still finding his game and potential.
- TandA4Flames

Anyone wanting Lazar protected instead of Ferland is out of their mind.

(Cue Sask mentioning he wants Vegas to take Brouwer off our hands)

Doesn't sound like those talks went very far. Our protection list is pretty much in stone in terms of defensemen. Good to hear Murray values Bennett.

Eklund is reporting that Justin Faulk is available. He'd round out the top 4 nicely.

Eklund is reporting that Justin Faulk is available. He'd round out the top 4 nicely.
- flamminghead

Won't be cheap!

Treliving isn't an idiot.Why would he put himself in the same situation he'd be savinf Anaheim from? Plus Bennett really picked up his game over the second half of the season and is domue for a breakout year.

I'd love to have Vatanen, but trading for him before the expansion draft makes no sense for us and trading him after the expansion draft makes even less sense for Anaheim. I just don't see how it would work.

Besides, I don't like only protecting 4 forwards. As it stands, we're in a good spot for expansion. There's nobody that has a NMC which means there isn't a single player we are forced to use a protection slot on.

Likely, or protected list will look something like this:

Monahan-Gaudreau-Backlund-Frolik-Bennett-Ferland-Lazar

Gio-Hamilton-Brodie

Dunno who for goalie.

I'm fine with that scenario. That gives Vegas the option to take Brouwer, Stajan, or Bouma (Stajan probably being most likely) and we don't lose any of our core. I see no reason to put ourselves in a situation that forces is to go 4-4-1 and risk losing a guy like Ferland.

Reading that it makes no sense to trade Vats after the expansion draft makes me actually wonder about that. Teams are going to lose D to the draft, and I would argue it "could" make Vats even more attractive to teams. Once the ED is completed, teams can trade for him without worrying about the need to protect him. His injury will make him unavailable for the first couple of months or so. His value is he's signed for the next 3 years at a decent cap hit.

Our GM has said he's spoken to GMGM and I have a feeling the Ducks have a deal already in place with Vegas.

Why the hell did they make that Lazar trade. They're going to end up losing Ferland to expansion because Lazar will be protected.
- flamminghead

Dude, relax. Right now Flames have zero expansion issues. We protect 3 D & we all know who they are, we protect 7 forwards, Sam, Sean, Johnny, Backs, Fro, Ferk & Lazar. I don't even know what goalie we are going to protect, all I know is we have one down in the minors that we are allowed to expose.

A trade like Todd is suggesting aint gonna happen. Bouma, Stajan, Chaisson, Brouwer will be one of the targets Vegas go after. My money is on Chaisson or Stajan.
There will be top 4 D available for trade at the draft we can speculate & fill our boots with. No way in hell Sammy gets traded.

Reading that it makes no sense to trade Vats after the expansion draft makes me actually wonder about that. Teams are going to lose D to the draft, and I would argue it "could" make Vats even more attractive to teams. Once the ED is completed, teams can trade for him without worrying about the need to protect him. His injury will make him unavailable for the first couple of months or so. His value is he's signed for the next 3 years at a decent cap hit.

Our GM has said he's spoken to GMGM and I have a feeling the Ducks have a deal already in place with Vegas.
- quackup

But if Anaheim gets out of the draft without losing him why would they trade him afterwards anyway? Anaheim could very well already have a deal in place with Vegas so that they don't lose him, but it makes no sense for the Ducks to lose an asset to Vegas to protect him only to turn around and deal him afterwards.

Is it crazy to expose Frolik? I can't imagine them not protecting Lazar since they just gave up a second rounder. With that assumption you have to choose between protecting Frolik or Ferland. I honestly would protect Ferland. If you loose Frolik they at least gain more cap room.
- flamminghead

Yes.

But if Anaheim gets out of the draft without losing him why would they trade him afterwards anyway? Anaheim could very well already have a deal in place with Vegas so that they don't lose him, but it makes no sense for the Ducks to lose an asset to Vegas to protect him only to turn around and deal him afterwards.
- Helios

I know that the belief is that this is all to do with the expansion draft but, let’s not forget that the ducks have 30million tied up in defense alone. If the Nights pass on Bieksa this does not leave the team a lot of money going forward to resign some of their younger forwards. Some of these forwards are due for some big pay raises and with all the assets they have on defense this could just boil down to a money thing more than an expansion draft scenario.

I know 90% of people on here would hate to see Bennett go with all the potential he has but this would also help us with our money situation as well.

We are going to have to re-sign Bennett and we are going to have to find a defencemen to play with Brodie. This would leave us money to resign Backlund and still go after an RW1.

I 100% agree this makes little sense if this trade is about the expansion but I have to agree with Todd this is good for a talk about hockey rather than bickering with each other.

This article is nonsense. Burke was just on the radio saying how good of a spot they are in going into the expansion draft. They don't have any issues to deal with like other teams have so why would the flames go out of their way to cause a problem for themselves and lose even more quality forwards. Free agency or post expansion draft trades is all you will see from BT.

I know that the belief is that this is all to do with the expansion draft but, let’s not forget that the ducks have 30million tied up in defense alone. If the Nights pass on Bieksa this does not leave the team a lot of money going forward to resign some of their younger forwards. Some of these forwards are due for some big pay raises and with all the assets they have on defense this could just boil down to a money thing more than an expansion draft scenario.

I know 90% of people on here would hate to see Bennett go with all the potential he has but this would also help us with our money situation as well.

We are going to have to re-sign Bennett and we are going to have to find a defencemen to play with Brodie. This would leave us money to resign Backlund and still go after an RW1.

I 100% agree this makes little sense if this trade is about the expansion but I have to agree with Todd this is good for a talk about hockey rather than bickering with each other.
- Yeah...Baby

Fowler is reportedly asking for 7x8. Only reason I can think of that the Ducks would trade a D after the draft.

I know that the belief is that this is all to do with the expansion draft but, let’s not forget that the ducks have 30million tied up in defense alone. If the Nights pass on Bieksa this does not leave the team a lot of money going forward to resign some of their younger forwards. Some of these forwards are due for some big pay raises and with all the assets they have on defense this could just boil down to a money thing more than an expansion draft scenario.

I know 90% of people on here would hate to see Bennett go with all the potential he has but this would also help us with our money situation as well.

We are going to have to re-sign Bennett and we are going to have to find a defencemen to play with Brodie. This would leave us money to resign Backlund and still go after an RW1.

I 100% agree this makes little sense if this trade is about the expansion but I have to agree with Todd this is good for a talk about hockey rather than bickering with each other.
- Yeah...Baby

Good point. I assumed it would be a draft scenario but it could very easily be cap issues that see him moved.

We aren't doing too bad on the cap ourselves, though. I believe we have 21.8 or something around there projected. That gives us some room to work with. Sure, we still need to go out and get a #1 tender, a top 4 D, and 1RW, but we have a bit of wiggle room here.

As much as a Bennett for Vatanen trade would sting for me, it is a decent deal for both sides. I think I could learn to live with it considering how nice our top 4 looks with Vatanen in there, but man does it feel a bit early to give up on Bennett.

It would be a good old fashioned hockey trade if it happened, but I doubt it'll be one that happens before expansion, if at all. I'm not convinced Anaheim's trading him within Conference, let alone Division, but it could happen. I think Tampa Bay or Toronto make way more sense as trade partners for the Ducks than we do, but if Anaheim is high on Bennett they might do it.

I don't get where you're thinking the Ducks have cap issues with our F depth. No we don't. We're losing Bernier and if we trade Vats, that's over 8M right there. Eaves, Thompson, etc., will either have to sign team friendly contracts, or they're gone. Ducks aren't losing any impact player. Heck, with teams losing D, maybe someone will take Stoner off our hands too.

Vats will only be traded if it looks like the Ducks are close to signing Fowler. With Montour/Theodore making the jump to the big club, Vats becomes the odd man out. I can actually see the Ducks moving Theodore also if the return was significant.

Fowler-Lindholm-Manson-Montour-Bieksa-?

I do that in a second - love SB

Why the hell did they make that Lazar trade. They're going to end up losing Ferland to expansion because Lazar will be protected.
- flamminghead

It does kind of handcuff them. Too bad, that 2nd rounder might have landed a much better player prior to the ED.

https://youtu.be/HK1ASgPEal8

Memorial Cup Final stream if anyone is interested.

(frank) trading Bennett, for fck sakes I would rather trade Gaudreau than Bennett. Call me crazy, but I think Bennett is going to be great, and love his style of play.