Tkachuk traded to FLA for Huberdeau+

[Joe S.]

Since March of this year, Florida has traded:

2023 1st round pick
2024 1st round pick
2025 1st round pick
2024 4th round pick
2023 3rd round pick
Tippet
Similanic
Huberdeau
Weegar
Schwindt

And have this to show for it

Tkachuk
Connor Bunnaman
2024 5th round pick
2025 4th round pick

 

[Guilt Trip]

Since March of this year, Florida has traded:

2023 1st round pick
2024 1st round pick
2025 1st round pick
2024 4th round pick
2023 3rd round pick
Tippet
Similanic
Huberdeau
Weegar
Schwindt

And have this to show for it

Tkachuk
Connor Bunnaman
2024 5th round pick
2025 4th round pick

But Dubas is the only idiot GM in the league.

 

[princedpw]

Am I wrong in thinking that this is an insanely lopsided trade in Calgary?s favour?

Why would Florida do this?

Maybe I'm crazy but I kind of see it the opposite way. In exchange for a 25 year old coming off a great season that they signed to a pretty reasonable 8 year extension, Florida gave up two pending UFA's who are both due substantial raises(Huberdeau's next deal, in particular, might be 10+ million a year starting in his age 30 season), a mid tier prospect and a pick that figures to be pretty low in the 1st round.

This only looks good for Calgary if you re-sign Huberdeau/Weegar and that costs...what? 15 million a season? More?

Contrast that with Florida where they get Tkachuk, who may already be better than Huberdeau, and have 5.5 million to replace Weegar who they reportedly wanted to move anyway.

From Calgary?s perspective, they traded a pending UFA (X) who announced to the world he definitely wouldn?t sign with them (reducing their trade leverage or at least not improving it) for 2 pending UFAs (Y, Z) who may sign with them, as well as a 1st rounder and a prospect. 

Now, they have options: they can try to sign Y, Z or they can try to turn around and trade them.  If they want to turn around and trade them, I?d expect they could get at least as much for them as I was expecting they?d get for X a week ago. 

If they want to just play out the season with Y, Z, I think Huberdeau alone is better than Tkachuk (though Tkachuk is much younger - I?d rather have Tkachuk for the next 8 years than Huberdeau).  Tkachuk looks a little overrated to me ? he wasn?t a ppg player before lining up next to gaudreau.

If they want to trade the new guys at the deadline, the haul will be huge.

Any way I look at it, Calgary seems much better off than before the trade.  Even if Huberdeau and Weegar both tell Calgary they won?t resign, I think Calgary?s better off than before they made the trade.

Of course, Florida might be better off too.  They might have lost talent this year but gained it in the following years, assuming they didn?t want to (or knew they couldn?t) resign the guys they traded.

 

[princedpw]

Since March of this year, Florida has traded:

2023 1st round pick
2024 1st round pick
2025 1st round pick
2024 4th round pick
2023 3rd round pick
Tippet
Similanic
Huberdeau
Weegar
Schwindt

And have this to show for it

Tkachuk
Connor Bunnaman
2024 5th round pick
2025 4th round pick

But Dubas is the only idiot GM in the league.

Yeah, that seems not good.

 

[Kin]

Any way I look at it, Calgary seems much better off than before the trade.  Even if Huberdeau and Weegar both tell Calgary they won?t resign, I think Calgary?s better off than before they made the trade.

Sure, if your basis for comparison is whether or not Calgary is in a better situation with Huberdeau and Weegar than with Tkachuk saying he definitely won't sign with them then I guess they're better.

That seems like a pretty misguided way to look at it though because just about any asset that will be around past next year would be better than having Tkachuk saying he's definitely leaving. The way to look at it from Calgary's perspective, I'd have thought, would have been by comparing the return they got from Florida to other returns they could have gotten from other teams, not to the prospect of sitting around and watching Tkachuk leave as a UFA.

And did they do ok in that sense? I suppose. We all agree that if they deal Huberdeau and Weegar at the deadline they could probably get solid returns. But given that the first they just got from Florida isn't until 2025, the ultimate return for Tkachuk could be four bottom of the first round picks, some not for a couple of years, which will probably mean very little to the team on the ice for 5-6 years or longer.

And if they re-sign Huberdeau/Weegar? Well, that would be a solid return hockey wise provided you're ok with giving Gaudreau a 7 year/70 million dollar contract or whatever at the age of 30.

So like I said, if you made me choose between Huberdeau and Weegar and actually having to pay them vs. some of the rumoured packages of younger players, prospects and picks that had been kicked about as possible returns for Tkachuk from, say, the Blues or Devils, I think Calgary may have been better off going in a different direction.

 

[herman]

Pretty sure he's gone by the end of the month. Over and done with, so Calgary has the offseason to recover and manage expectations and start to integrate any new pieces that come from this move. A sign and trade at this point would probably net the best return (8 years, slightly lower AAV).

https://twitter.com/fan960steinberg/status/1550920142430695425
I did not realize the NHL eschewed this technique prior.

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

If it should happen that neither Huberdeau nor Weegar sign an extension during the course of the season, Calgary has gotta be hoping for either a really good or really bad regular season. After how last season and this offseason have played out, imagine the Flames as a borderline playoff team deciding on whether or not to cash out on their impending UFAs. Certainly they should if that?s how the season plays out, but most GMs don?t have the guts to follow through.

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

It?s pretty crazy that 3 of the 2021-22 top 8 in NHL scoring are changing teams this offseason.

Anyway, for old time?s sake:

https://twitter.com/jomboy_/status/1354474193975447557

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

https://twitter.com/daviddwork/status/1550952612874358785

Any time you can trade a player who doesn?t want to be there for a much older player on an expiring contract who also doesn?t want to be there, you gotta pull the trigger.

Initially, I thought this trade was so lopsided in Calgary?s favour, but I honestly don?t feel that way anymore. Huberdeau will be 30 at the end of this season. A star 30-year-old looking for a big long contract isn?t the greatest asset to have, other than as trade material. In the absence of this trade, Florida almost certainly wouldn?t have traded him this year, they certainly wouldn?t have traded him at the deadline, and they risked losing him for nothing/being cap-unable to re-sign him at the end of the year. They flipped him, with other assets, for a superstar player 5 years younger signed long term.

If Calgary extends Huberdeau with a big long contract, they probably regret it in a few years. And if they trade him by the deadline (Weegar, too), they?re getting more futures, including late 1st round picks. Which is fine, but in the end, they will have traded a current young superstar for a small bucket of moderately valuable assets that may help the team in a handful of years.

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

https://twitter.com/TheAthletic/status/1551394508142690304

[emoji51]

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Two cap dumps (Tarasenko rebounded well and all but I still think if the Blues needed to move him it'd be Pacioretty-style at this point) and (probably) a 1st rounder.

 

[bustaheims]

If that was their offer, they clearly weren't that serious about acquiring him.

 

[bustaheims]

Any time you can trade a player who doesn?t want to be there for a much older player on an expiring contract who also doesn?t want to be there, you gotta pull the trigger.

Initially, I thought this trade was so lopsided in Calgary?s favour, but I honestly don?t feel that way anymore. Huberdeau will be 30 at the end of this season. A star 30-year-old looking for a big long contract isn?t the greatest asset to have, other than as trade material. In the absence of this trade, Florida almost certainly wouldn?t have traded him this year, they certainly wouldn?t have traded him at the deadline, and they risked losing him for nothing/being cap-unable to re-sign him at the end of the year. They flipped him, with other assets, for a superstar player 5 years younger signed long term.

If Calgary extends Huberdeau with a big long contract, they probably regret it in a few years. And if they trade him by the deadline (Weegar, too), they?re getting more futures, including late 1st round picks. Which is fine, but in the end, they will have traded a current young superstar for a small bucket of moderately valuable assets that may help the team in a handful of years.

I don't know about that. I look at the key pieces of the deal, and I see Huberdeau as the most likely to be able to maintain his level of play. He's been a point/game center for 4 seasons now. If Calgary can sign him to a 5 year deal, they probably get god value out of that. For Tkachuk, the level he hit last season feels much more like an outlier.

 

[Wally Kazoo]

I think it's one of the great hockey trades of this era.
both teams trading for what they needed. Although I love Huberdeau in fantasy. I don't see him as  a player that plays the style of game that is conducive to playoff success. It takes a big pair of cojones to pull off a swap like that. I say Flames won trade however Panthers just got closer to a cup.

 

[herman]

Welcome to the board, Wally

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

Any time you can trade a player who doesn?t want to be there for a much older player on an expiring contract who also doesn?t want to be there, you gotta pull the trigger.

Initially, I thought this trade was so lopsided in Calgary?s favour, but I honestly don?t feel that way anymore. Huberdeau will be 30 at the end of this season. A star 30-year-old looking for a big long contract isn?t the greatest asset to have, other than as trade material. In the absence of this trade, Florida almost certainly wouldn?t have traded him this year, they certainly wouldn?t have traded him at the deadline, and they risked losing him for nothing/being cap-unable to re-sign him at the end of the year. They flipped him, with other assets, for a superstar player 5 years younger signed long term.

If Calgary extends Huberdeau with a big long contract, they probably regret it in a few years. And if they trade him by the deadline (Weegar, too), they?re getting more futures, including late 1st round picks. Which is fine, but in the end, they will have traded a current young superstar for a small bucket of moderately valuable assets that may help the team in a handful of years.

I don't know about that. I look at the key pieces of the deal, and I see Huberdeau as the most likely to be able to maintain his level of play. He's been a point/game center for 4 seasons now. If Calgary can sign him to a 5 year deal, they probably get god value out of that. For Tkachuk, the level he hit last season feels much more like an outlier.

I could be wrong, but I?d be very surprised to see him settling for a 5 year deal. If Calgary can get him for that term, then sure, that changes everything. I expect he?s looking for a big, long contract.

 

[bustaheims]

I could be wrong, but I?d be very surprised to see him settling for a 5 year deal. If Calgary can get him for that term, then sure, that changes everything. I expect he?s looking for a big, long contract.

I have to imagine he's smart enough to recognize it's unlikely he gets a 7 or 8 year deal (not impossible, but I definitely wouldn't put money on it). If Calgary offers him good value for 5 or 6 years, I think he'll take it. Probably ends up with similar real dollars, too, as any contract he'd sign would have cheaper seasons tacked on to the end.

 

[Kin]

He's been a point/game center for 4 seasons now.

Not that it especially matters but he's not a center.

And without wanting to talk poorly about a city I don't know very well, I'm a little inclined to think that the guy who's been in Miami the last 10 years may require some financial inducement to stay in Calgary over and above what he might get elsewhere.

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

I could be wrong, but I?d be very surprised to see him settling for a 5 year deal. If Calgary can get him for that term, then sure, that changes everything. I expect he?s looking for a big, long contract.

I have to imagine he's smart enough to recognize it's unlikely he gets a 7 or 8 year deal (not impossible, but I definitely wouldn't put money on it). If Calgary offers him good value for 5 or 6 years, I think he'll take it. Probably ends up with similar real dollars, too, as any contract he'd sign would have cheaper seasons tacked on to the end.

https://twitter.com/frank_seravalli/status/1555385101139288065

 

[Bender]

I could be wrong, but I?d be very surprised to see him settling for a 5 year deal. If Calgary can get him for that term, then sure, that changes everything. I expect he?s looking for a big, long contract.

I have to imagine he's smart enough to recognize it's unlikely he gets a 7 or 8 year deal (not impossible, but I definitely wouldn't put money on it). If Calgary offers him good value for 5 or 6 years, I think he'll take it. Probably ends up with similar real dollars, too, as any contract he'd sign would have cheaper seasons tacked on to the end.

https://twitter.com/frank_seravalli/status/1555385101139288065

That's a scary contract.