SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

We move

Created by: CorrosionRF
Team: 2023-24 Calgary Flames
Initial Creation Date: Jul. 24, 2023
Published: Aug. 1, 2023
Salary Cap Mode: Basic
Description
Idk I’m just having fun
Trades
1.
CGY
  1. Roslovic, Jack
  2. Sillinger, Cole
  3. 2024 1st round pick (CBJ)
Additional Details:
Top 10 protected. Structured like the Horvat deal, but slightly better cause Lindholm is worth more.
CBJ
  1. Lindholm, Elias
Additional Details:
They have Fantilli so idk if they'd even have any interest anymore, but we all know how much fun Babcock has with young players so you never know.
2.
CGY
  1. 2024 4th round pick (ANA)
ANA
  1. Vladar, Daniel
Additional Details:
Anywhere
3.
CGY
  1. Ritchie, Calum [Reserve List]
  2. 2025 3rd round pick (COL)
Additional Details:
3rd is take it or leave it idrc. Ritchie won't make an nhl impact for a few years and the Avs need people who can make an impact now.
COL
  1. Backlund, Mikael ($2,675,000 retained)
Additional Details:
Avs finished bottom 16 in penalty kill last year, Backlund is a pk machine. I think this might still put the Avs over the cap but the Flames could take cap back if needed. Backlund just wants to win and would probably resign for cheap if he thought this was the place to do it.
4.
CGY
  1. Kyrou, Christian
  2. Suter, Ryan
  3. 2024 1st round pick (DAL)
Additional Details:
Does Ryan Suter waive for Canada.... Probably not. I think this is fair for Hanifin, probably late 1st, decent prospect and a cap dump.
DAL
  1. Hanifin, Noah
Additional Details:
Dallas d-core is sketchy as F. Hanifin would be a much needed improvement.
Retained Salary Transactions
Buried
DraftRound 1Round 2Round 3Round 4Round 5Round 6Round 7
2024
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CBJ
Logo of the DAL
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the ANA
Logo of the CGY
2025
Logo of the FLA
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the COL
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
2026
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
ROSTER SIZESALARY CAPCAP HITOVERAGES TooltipBONUSESCAP SPACE
23$83,500,000$73,914,999$0$1,927,500$9,585,001
Left WingCentreRight Wing
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$10,500,000$10,500,000
LW, RW
NMC
UFA - 8
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$7,000,000$7,000,000
C
NMC
UFA - 6
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$3,100,000$3,100,000
C, LW, RW
UFA - 2
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$2,300,000$2,300,000
LW, RW, C
RFA - 1
Logo of the Columbus Blue Jackets
$2,000,000$2,000,000
C, RW
UFA - 1
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$5,800,000$5,800,000
RW, LW
M-NTC
UFA - 2
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$863,333$863,333
LW
RFA - 1
Logo of the Columbus Blue Jackets
$925,000$925,000 (Performance Bonus$850,000$850K)
C
RFA - 1
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$925,000$925,000 (Performance Bonus$850,000$850K)
RW
RFA - 2
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$4,900,000$4,900,000
RW, LW
NTC
UFA - 4
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$762,500$762,500
LW, C
UFA - 1
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$825,000$825,000
RW
UFA - 2
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$863,333$863,333 (Performance Bonus$212,500$212K)
LW, C
RFA - 2
Left DefenseRight DefenseGoaltender
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$6,250,000$6,250,000
LD/RD
NTC
UFA - 8
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$4,550,000$4,550,000
RD
UFA - 3
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$6,000,000$6,000,000
G
NMC
UFA - 3
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$2,500,000$2,500,000
LD/RD
UFA - 1
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$1,125,000$1,125,000
RD
M-NTC
UFA - 1
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$813,333$813,333 (Performance Bonus$15,000$15K)
G
RFA - 1
Logo of the Dallas Stars
$3,650,000$3,650,000
LD
NMC
UFA - 2
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$3,750,000$3,750,000
LD/RD
UFA - 1
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$925,000$925,000
LD/RD
UFA - 1
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$762,500$762,500
LD
UFA - 1

Embed Code

  • To display this team on another website or blog, add this iFrame to the appropriate page
  • Customize the height attribute in the iFrame code below to fit your website appropriately. Minimum recommended: 400px.

Text-Embed

Click to Highlight
Aug. 1, 2023 at 2:59 a.m.
#1
Bootheblues
Avatar of the user
Joined: Oct. 2021
Posts: 1,532
Likes: 438
No chance
Aug. 1, 2023 at 3:55 a.m.
#2
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2019
Posts: 38,401
Likes: 19,597
Pass on Roslovic, replace him with another prospect
Aug. 1, 2023 at 7:46 a.m.
#3
RETIRED
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2019
Posts: 4,846
Likes: 2,481
No chance that COL deal sounded fair in your own head even 5 minutes after posting this. Backlund for the 27th OA in the draft from a few weeks ago “plus” a 3rd rd pick hahahah
HockeyManiac95, JeffW, M96N29 and 1 other person liked this.
Aug. 1, 2023 at 8:06 a.m.
#4
Dolzhenkov Is Coming
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2022
Posts: 3,637
Likes: 5,263
I wouldn't mind Lindholm if his contract was going to come in under $8M and the cost was some combination of 2 or 3 of Peeke, Boqvist, Dumais, LDBB, Ceulemans, Knazko, Richard, and a 2025 1st or something. I've no interest in trading any of the top young guys or 4-5 prospects from the pool. Lindholm isn't an 80 point Selke candidate anymore and was only that briefly to begin with.
dopplsan, CaseyFlyman and SK101 liked this.
Aug. 1, 2023 at 9:14 a.m.
#5
Nah.
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 4,472
Likes: 4,353
Edited Aug. 1, 2023 at 9:20 a.m.
Quoting: dk325
I wouldn't mind Lindholm if his contract was going to come in under $8M and the cost was some combination of 2 or 3 of Peeke, Boqvist, Dumais, LDBB, Ceulemans, Knazko, Richard, and a 2025 1st or something. I've no interest in trading any of the top young guys or 4-5 prospects from the pool. Lindholm isn't an 80 point Selke candidate anymore and was only that briefly to begin with.


I was in on the Lindholm buzz for awhile, but I’ve gotten away from that.

IMO, I’d prefer we move for Backlund, who can be a better stop-gap for a year to give Fantilli some breathing room. If he wants to sign short and cheap after that, all the better.

He profiles as a slightly better version of Jenner, albeit he’s also a true C, and has the age concern. I wouldn’t give up as much as OP wants, but with retention, I’d be willing to send Roslovic plus a piece or two, if it means (finally) lowering Boone’s ice time to limit the injury risk.
dk325 and CaseyFlyman liked this.
Aug. 1, 2023 at 9:14 a.m.
#6
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 4,187
Likes: 1,650
If the avs were going to make that deal they wouldn't have brought in johansen and colton... I'm sure cgy would have wanted the pick itself at the draft so they could have gotten their own guy
M96N29, McRanteskog and TJTwolf liked this.
Aug. 1, 2023 at 9:29 a.m.
#7
Dolzhenkov Is Coming
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2022
Posts: 3,637
Likes: 5,263
Quoting: dopplsan
I was in on the Lindholm buzz for awhile, but I’ve gotten away from that.

IMO, I’d prefer we move for Backlund, who can be a better stop-gap for a year to give Fantilli some breathing room. If he wants to sign short and cheap after that, all the better.

He profiles as a slightly better version of Jenner, albeit he’s also a true C, and has the age concern. I wouldn’t give up as much as OP wants, but with retention, I’d be willing to send Roslovic plus a piece or two, if it means (finally) lowering Boone’s ice time to limit the injury risk.


The ridiculous proposals from Flames fans and that dummy Portzline feeding the fire really killed the fun of thinking about it almost instantly.

Most proposals on the site are getting that way recently. Seems like any proposal for any player of significance is met with the same "It'll take Jiricek, Fantilli, Johnson or some combination of the 3 plus a 1st to make that trade". I keep trying to remind myself that it's a good thing that the Jackets have great prospects that people want to rip off, but it doesn't make for much fun when reading posts.
dopplsan, CaseyFlyman, SK101 and 1 other person liked this.
Aug. 1, 2023 at 9:50 a.m.
#8
Nah.
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 4,472
Likes: 4,353
Quoting: dk325
The ridiculous proposals from Flames fans and that dummy Portzline feeding the fire really killed the fun of thinking about it almost instantly.

Most proposals on the site are getting that way recently. Seems like any proposal for any player of significance is met with the same "It'll take Jiricek, Fantilli, Johnson or some combination of the 3 plus a 1st to make that trade". I keep trying to remind myself that it's a good thing that the Jackets have great prospects that people want to rip off, but it doesn't make for much fun when reading posts.


Lol, welcome to CapFriendly, right?

An older C with a few Sellers-worthy high-end seasons producing alongside great talent, who is on the verge of getting what is likely going to be a bad contract, and oh yeah - he’s wushu-washy on whether he even wants to stay. Frankly, I don’t see why his price should be much higher than Horvat - a roster player, a protected 1st, and a good prospect.
CaseyFlyman and SK101 liked this.
Aug. 1, 2023 at 10:33 a.m.
#9
Avatar of the user
Joined: Feb. 2022
Posts: 3,151
Likes: 2,830
Quoting: dopplsan
I was in on the Lindholm buzz for awhile, but I’ve gotten away from that.

IMO, I’d prefer we move for Backlund, who can be a better stop-gap for a year to give Fantilli some breathing room. If he wants to sign short and cheap after that, all the better.

He profiles as a slightly better version of Jenner, albeit he’s also a true C, and has the age concern. I wouldn’t give up as much as OP wants, but with retention, I’d be willing to send Roslovic plus a piece or two, if it means (finally) lowering Boone’s ice time to limit the injury risk.


I was on the same train. After drafting fantilli 1C isn’t as drastic of a need. I think between fantilli, Kent Johnson, and sillinger they have 2 future top 6 Cs. I agree I would rather have backlund. He shouldn’t cost as much and can be a stop gap/mentor for the young centers
Aug. 1, 2023 at 10:36 a.m.
#10
Avatar of the user
Joined: Feb. 2022
Posts: 3,151
Likes: 2,830
Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy
Pass on Roslovic, replace him with another prospect


Roslovic is in there to make the salary work. Sillinger and a first is enough for lindholm although I think it’s less likely the jackets pursue him now.
Aug. 1, 2023 at 11:04 a.m.
#11
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2019
Posts: 38,401
Likes: 19,597
Quoting: SK101
Roslovic is in there to make the salary work. Sillinger and a first is enough for lindholm although I think it’s less likely the jackets pursue him now.


How can you not make the cap work without Roslovic included? According to CF, Columbus has $4,729,167 cap space with 24 signed players on their roster. Assuming All 3 of Werenski, Bean, and Danforth are activated from LTIR you would be sending at least 1 player will be sent down (my guess is Blankenburg). That would add another 825k in available cap space for a total of $5,554,167. Given that Lindholm makes less than 5M Columbus can absolutely fit him in. And if you are that worried about performance bonuses Calgary could absolutely retain.

Also I completely disagree that Sillinger and a protected 1st is enough for a full season of Lindholm (where you will likely be extending him). Sillinger is still a prospect with high potential but he he's about as valuable as Boqvist was when you traded 1 year of Jones to Chicago.
Aug. 1, 2023 at 11:38 a.m.
#12
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2023
Posts: 580
Likes: 169
Quoting: dk325
The ridiculous proposals from Flames fans and that dummy Portzline feeding the fire really killed the fun of thinking about it almost instantly.

Most proposals on the site are getting that way recently. Seems like any proposal for any player of significance is met with the same "It'll take Jiricek, Fantilli, Johnson or some combination of the 3 plus a 1st to make that trade". I keep trying to remind myself that it's a good thing that the Jackets have great prospects that people want to rip off, but it doesn't make for much fun when reading posts.


I thought this proposal here was quite reasonable though, isn't it? And every team has fans on here who are insane when it comes to proposals, both over and undervaluing players
CorrosionRF liked this.
Aug. 1, 2023 at 11:40 a.m.
#13
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2023
Posts: 580
Likes: 169
Quoting: dopplsan
I was in on the Lindholm buzz for awhile, but I’ve gotten away from that.

IMO, I’d prefer we move for Backlund, who can be a better stop-gap for a year to give Fantilli some breathing room. If he wants to sign short and cheap after that, all the better.

He profiles as a slightly better version of Jenner, albeit he’s also a true C, and has the age concern. I wouldn’t give up as much as OP wants, but with retention, I’d be willing to send Roslovic plus a piece or two, if it means (finally) lowering Boone’s ice time to limit the injury risk.


What kind of pieces would you trade for Backlund? I'd say that if Roslovic is included, he would be considered to have neutral value and just there for cap purposes
Aug. 1, 2023 at 11:59 a.m.
#14
Nah.
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 4,472
Likes: 4,353
Quoting: Erbas1915
What kind of pieces would you trade for Backlund? I'd say that if Roslovic is included, he would be considered to have neutral value and just there for cap purposes


Roslovic, yes, and you could add Bemstrom, Foudy, or maybe Robinson. CBJ really need to clear out roster spots.

I’d be willing to include Bean, or maybe Boqvist, but would want to include a pick-swap in favor of CBJ. I just done see Backlund’s value as being near a 1st or so.
Aug. 1, 2023 at 12:07 p.m.
#15
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2023
Posts: 580
Likes: 169
Quoting: dopplsan
Roslovic, yes, and you could add Bemstrom, Foudy, or maybe Robinson. CBJ really need to clear out roster spots.

I’d be willing to include Bean, or maybe Boqvist, but would want to include a pick-swap in favor of CBJ. I just done see Backlund’s value as being near a 1st or so.


What kind of pick swap are you thinking then?
Aug. 1, 2023 at 12:29 p.m.
#16
Nah.
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 4,472
Likes: 4,353
Quoting: Erbas1915
What kind of pick swap are you thinking then?


2nd for a 3rd? Not sure if retention is needed.
Aug. 1, 2023 at 12:30 p.m.
#17
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2023
Posts: 580
Likes: 169
Quoting: dopplsan
2nd for a 3rd? Not sure if retention is needed.


So you mean the Flames give up a 2nd and receive a 3rd in return?
Aug. 1, 2023 at 1:28 p.m.
#18
Nah.
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 4,472
Likes: 4,353
Quoting: Erbas1915
So you mean the Flames give up a 2nd and receive a 3rd in return?


Yes
Aug. 1, 2023 at 1:29 p.m.
#19
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2023
Posts: 580
Likes: 169
Quoting: dopplsan
Yes


So the Flames give up the better player and the better pick in the trade? I’m not sure how that’s supposed to make any sense.
Aug. 1, 2023 at 2:24 p.m.
#20
Dolzhenkov Is Coming
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2022
Posts: 3,637
Likes: 5,263
Quoting: Erbas1915
I thought this proposal here was quite reasonable though, isn't it? And every team has fans on here who are insane when it comes to proposals, both over and undervaluing players


I'm talking more about the 3rd OA+ and KJ+ asks that were getting posted repeatedly. Although, I'm not a fan of these proposals that involve Sillinger either. I'd move on in a heartbeat if the Flames drew a hard line on having him included in a trade.
Erbas1915 liked this.
Aug. 1, 2023 at 2:28 p.m.
#21
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2023
Posts: 580
Likes: 169
Quoting: dk325
I'm talking more about the 3rd OA+ and KJ+ asks that were getting posted repeatedly. Although, I'm not a fan of these proposals that involve Sillinger either. I'd move on in a heartbeat if the Flames drew a hard line on having him included in a trade.


Well yeah those were never happening obviously, but that's just the mirror image of some CBJ fan proposals of like Roslovic, Peeke and a 3rd that I've seen on here. And for what it's worth I wouldn't want Sillinger included anyways, I'm not high on him at all
Aug. 1, 2023 at 2:55 p.m.
#22
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2015
Posts: 456
Likes: 47
Calgary takes the Colorado deal and runs
TJTwolf liked this.
Aug. 1, 2023 at 4:25 p.m.
#23
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2017
Posts: 9,589
Likes: 4,577
LOL! Simply no from Colorado. The logic isn't even there to make it reasonable.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Add Option
Submit Poll