clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Kyle Turris and Trade Scenarios with the Flames

I am all for acquiring Kyle Turris for the right price. I think everyone is but what is the price is another question. There are six trade scenarios in this Calgary Sun article and I would veto a few, definitely the one including a 1st round pick. The first one with the first round pick is a clear loss. Calgary at this time simply can not ship 1st round picks given its current state. But what is the best one, vote away below.

My position is definitely more enthusiastic about getting Turris than most here and I'll elaborate on that. Is there better centers out there, better players? Sure there is BUT the whole point is what is realistic and where is the best trade to be had.

Is Arik's article on better fits than Kyle Turris being available accurate in theory? Sure it is. Is it realistic? I don't think so.

Even with rumors of Sam Gagner being shopped what are the chances the Calgary Flames and Edmonton Oilers do another deal?

Heck, what are the chances they deal with any other team in the NW Division? Top it off with the fact that the minute I read the Gagner trade rumors my first thought is I wonder what kind of latent injury and damaged goods Steve Tambellini is shipping this time. What is the real medical prognosis on the kid now?

I personally didn't even look at the numbers on Gagner. It is open and shut to me because he is on the Oilers and they certainly are not negotiating from a position of weakness like the Phoenix Coyotes are. Lets get into all those details and why a good trade should be available and why Flames fans should be happy about it.

After all Calgary certainly doesn't have to trade for Turris, if the good deal is there they take it. If not they leave the Yotes with their depreciating asset. No skin off the Flames nose but the Yotes are a worse team after Dec 1 if they haven't moved Turris.

Point 1: Kyle Turris is a spoilt kid with a bad attitude

Flames fans are fresh off the Tim Erixon burn. Players demanding a trade is nothing new. Players do it all the time. It sucks but as a GM you do what is best for the team. The current CBA already places much more restriction on young players than it used to. Turris at least signed the entry level deal with the Yotes and gave them three years, which is more than Erixon would do for the Flames.

The kid is upset with his development in Phoenix. He has a case. He was a college player and he probably should have been sent to season for a few years in the AHL. Rushing young talent into the NHL often wrecks their careers. This is something the Flames have been much better at and have not done.

Point 2: We don't need him

Don't kid yourself. The Flames outside of Backlund do not have a top rated young Centre prospect. Even if you drop Turris out of the top 5 in his draft year - he is still probably fairly seen as a top 10 ranked pick. They need Centre prospects.

Even a reclamation project like Turris is an improvement in this regard. In a time when the prospect cupboard is pretty bare, Turris is certainly not something you turn your back on. You don't over pay but you don't turn your back on it either.

Point 3: Maloney has said he absolutely will not trade him

It hardly needs to be mentioned here on M&G but GMs use the mainstream media as a tool all the time to increase interest. Darryl Sutter stated absolutely and in no uncertain terms that Dion Phaneuf would not be traded and three days later he was on a plane to Toronto. Happens all the time.

Maloney is doing his job and trying to jack up interest and the price on Turris by continually publicly stating this. The fact that the Yotes camp leaked the opening salary demand from the Turris camp of 4 million to publicly poison the perception of the kid, tells me he will be traded. The atmosphere in Phoenix now is beyond repair.

Point 4: Bourque is too valuable

Rene Bourque is a highly skilled player but the Flames can move him. Is he a high price to pay? Yes and No. If the Flames were not sitting on a overflowing roster of NHL players this year I would say yes he is too valuable but they are sitting on an overflowing roster. Bourque can be moved because at the current moment he is not even earning himself a spot on the top 2 lines due to the crowd.

Bourque is also an attractive commodity to Phoenix because he played often with Langkow and likely would again in Phoenix. Combining the two again would have strong results for the Yotes for this season.

Even if Bourque is considered too valuable to be traded it does not veto the trade. Calgary can present several other prospect scenarios which are more than viable.

Point 5: The NHL owns the Yotes and they will veto the trade to "teach Turris a lesson"

This to me is one of the silliest things you can say. The NHL wrote the CBA, Turris is doing nothing wrong. Have we all forgot already the other RFA who held out? Drew Doughty, Zach Bogosian, Steven Stamkos etc. He is enacting his limited rights as a young player at this point in his career.

IF the NHL was to veto a trade because they are the "owner" of a bankrupt club to teach ALL young players a lesson, it would be acting against the best interests of the Yotes and their fans.

How are the Yotes better served by taking a hard line and sitting Turris for the season and letting him depreciate further in value? Short answer, they aren't. The NHL may have a self-imposed Cap on the team that may prevent the trading of a quality roster player like Rene Bourque due to cost but there is nothing stopping them from moving prospects and picks for Turris.

Point 6: Phoenix and Calgary are frequent trade partners

Another reason why it is no stretch to expect a deal on Nov 30. Phoenix and Calgary have proven they can work together. In this particular case I expect Calgary to "win" the trade with Phoenix because Calgary is dealing from a position of strength.

If a strong trade for Calgary can not be made, walk away. It hurts Phoenix more to not make this trade than it does Calgary not to make it.

Point 7: How can you possibly talk about trading prospects for Turris - that is treading water. He could be Matt Stajan 2.0

It isn't treading water. Turris even with all his stumbles still represents a higher quality prospect than what will go out the door for him. Same principle as the Tim Erixon trade. 2 second rounders and Horak for Tim Erixon (a 1st rounder) and a 5th rounder. Turris is a risk, make no mistake about it but he is a higher reward gamble.

It is true he may turn into Matt Stajan 2.0 or he could turn into a legitimate 1st line C. It is a risk that is worth taking in Calgary's case.


In conclusion, I have personally been quite surprised at the out-cry against Turris. Is this not what so many have wanted here? Start the rebuild. Bring in quality youthful prospects. Ship out the old Sutter core.

We all expect a win if this trade happens and everyone should be looking forward to it, at least in these hazy days before we see what is actually moved. It should be a clear win.

Vote for your best scenario below