FlamesLogic

I think the hangup on Andersen has gone a bit too far. Hes not worth offer sheeting. I like him in that hes a larger goalie and his stats are strong, but then again they are padded by playing on a sound defensive team in the ducks. A similar goalie that can likely be had as a UFA is Chad Johnson. Granted hes an inch shorter at 6'3" but hes had similar numbers with more experience and done it across 5 different teams. Now I dont believe he is a true #1 but I think he is in the conversation with a guy like a Reimer as someone we can bring in for 2-3 years to man the ship with Ortio while our own big talented goalies in Gillies and McDonald mature. The upside is that combination of goalie costs is likely HALF of what we spent in net this year and can mean the difference between bringing in a guy like Okposo for the top line. There are more goalies than there are jobs nowadays. Unless you have a carey price or another true #1 why spend more money than you need to?

Sweet, I was close on this one. ABC923 was dead on though: http://fans.flames.nhl.com/community/topic/21682-mark-giordano-wants-9mil/?p=677213

Right, with all of training camp, all of penticton and 4 of 8 preseason games complete. The only way I dont circle that as my decision point is if there is some rule where waiver eligible players can't be assigned before that date. Even if BT doesnt like Ortio (just for arguments sake) he has shown that he gets a return on his assets.

I would hope the Flames have a good enough read on their goalies early enough to make that call. Hey for all we know it will be Hiller getting put into AHL if we cant trade him. BT isnt worried about the contract dollars involved this year he only cares about what is best for his goalie situation.

I thought there was an early waiver exempt period

Which only matters if he is brought up mid season and needs to be sent back down. Ortio starting in AHL also allows GIllies to ease into the league instead of being thrown right into the fire

One way deal just means he gets paid same no matter what.

I give BT top marks so far. Best savvy GM moves we have seen in decades. A proper balance of risk taking and restraint.

Its looking like Calgary has pick of Ramo or Neuvirth on a 3ish year deal to platoon with Hiller. There is no one else left that is looking to add a goalie to a good part of a platoon. Ideally they deal Hiller at deadline and bring Ortio up. Gillies then becomes starting in AHL for next couple years until decision needs to be made on NHL goalies. McDonald then takes over in AHL crease if no better prospect has emerged. Goalie spots left: Arizona needs strict backup to Smith Chicago has backup to Crawford open (will be taken by Darling) CHI signed Leighton to minimum contract as Darling can still do AHL. LA has a backup spot to Quick open (wont be looking to spend much on UFA due to cap and may have AHLer Berube ready to promote) Islanders have spot open to pair with Halak. Halak at 4.5M likely means Islanders cant spend too much on partner for an equal or minor share of platoon. Philly has spot open to pair with Mason. Mason has 4.1M and Philly is tight on cap (less than 7mil to spend on Del Zotto and goalie) Pitts has backup to Fleury spot open (will be spending minimum on backup) St Louis has spot open to pair with Brian Elliot. (The also have 25 yr old RFA Jake Allen though who is likely cheaper and just as talented as any UFA so highly unlikely they add). Tampa has backup to Bishop spot open (and zero dollars to spend on one, so basically think NHL minimum contracts) Toronto has spot open to pair with Reimer (but is in arbitration with Bernier, so if they sign a goalie it means Bernier is walking) Washington has spot open to start over Justin Peters (They also have RFA starter Brandon Holtby though so unlikely to add) So of all the teams with spots technically "open" the only other teams that may be willing to spend 3-4M on a goalie is the Islanders and I can see them getting a guy like Viktor Fasth or Nabokov for like 2.5M over 3 years instead. Really when it comes to Ramo and Neuvirth we are mostly bidding against KHL teams and with the way the Russian economy and political situation is we have all the leverage here. I would whichever of these guys takes around a 4year 3M AAV deal.

Right the only reason you spend draft picks for a goalie is if there is a potential and many years of service available. You don't spend it to get a guy that is likely similar to Ramo. Most likely case is Ramo comes back, he just wants to get an idea of fair market value first. Fact is there is multiple goalies of similar caliber available in UFA. Guys that are likely not true # 1's but can handle the larger share of a platoon. The one thing working against the goalie UFA market is that there is only so many chairs for them. Once they get filled the offers start drying up quick. So I would expect a guy like Ramo to sign somewhere within first day or two and I would still put the Flames as the odds on favourite unless Treliving thinks he can get improved production from someone else, even if its not until years 2 or 3 when it starts to become more important.

I don't get Talbot or Jones. They are both goalies that play for teams that focus on defense. It boosts their stats as a result. If I was giving up two seconds for a goalies it needs to be a guy like Bernier who at 26 is likely just hitting his stride and has higher overall potential. My only worry is that Toronto has ruined him.

No it just means that a) Hiller is done after this contract and Ortio has to play his way onto the team. The best use of assets would be to resign Ramo to a market deal, deal Hiller at deadline to anyone that needs a vet backup and then platoon Ramo and Ortio until Ramos contract is up. Then rinse repeat with Ortio and Gilles. Then Gilles and McDonald. Have the pipeline ready to stay one step ahead of the realities of the NHL market. If a part of the pipeline looks like it may not pan out then replace it. The reason the flames needed to go out and get Ramo and Hiller was because Kipper had been an undisputed #1 for so long and the team didnt do a good job in spending a pick to keep the pipeline strong. Those second rounders Sutter kept spending on old vets could of been better used on keeping the pipeline stocked.

The key is to what degree. These 8 year contracts to young guys have been handed out in years where there is significant cap growth year over year. If that tapers it severely impacts the desirability to extend those contracts at big dollars

Dollar was at 92 cents for bulk of last season. Since the start of the season it has dropped to 78 cents. Thats a drop of about 16%. Canada accounts for 36% of the revenue of the NHL give or take. So just from the loonie alone the entire revenue is dropping 6-7% or about 250-300 million dollars. ~10 mil per team. 50% goes to players so you have a net negative effect of ~5 million on per team revenue. That will have a significant impact on the cap and 8 yr contracts that looked like they were going to get cheaper as the cap goes up suddenly dont look as attractive.

Subban got the Phaneuf treatment. How well did that work out? Gio is smarter than that. As well Subban got the deal for 8 years and will end when he is 32 or essentially a contract for his entire prime years. Its not even the same scenario. Again, while Gio is a top 10 dman he hasnt won a norris or even been a nominee yet so why are you treating him like one? Gio is awesome and if he didnt get injured again he had a shot at the norris this year, but games played count when a team needs to pay a second guy 20 games every year for you.

Gio also hasnt played more than 64 games in a season since 2010. Lidstrom never missed more than a handful of games each year. Same with Chara until this year when he turns 38. Gio is a top 10 dman these last 2 years not necessarily because of his talent but because of his effort and heart. Because of that he has shown that he will lose significant time to injury. The more injuries that pile up the sooner your body winds down and the slower it bounces back. Its a fact of all athletes, look at Jake Locker in the NFL. Retiring after 4 years at age 26. When Gio is in the 5/6/7 year of his deal he wont be a #1 dman. Im ok with paying Gio until he is 38. Im not ok paying him as a top 10 dman until he is 38. If he wants a 7 year deal I do it at Wideman money. I know this is the internet but its ok to just admit you are wrong.

I think Gio has been playing like a top 10 dman the last two years and if he shows the same next year by all means pay him like a top 10 guy. Just dont do it for 7 more years when he is 38 and his game has slowed down and everyone starts to regard his contract as an anchor. Average cap hit for a top 10 dman = 6.9785 Player Cap Number Final Year Term Age weber 7.857 2027 14 41 suter 7.538 2026 13 40 letang 7.25 2023 8 35 campbell 7.14 2017 8 37 doughty 7 2020 8 30 dion 7 2022 7 36 chara 6.917 2019 7 41 pieterangelo 6.5 2021 7 30 karlsson 6.5 2020 7 29 green 6.083 2016 3 30 AVG 6.9785 2021.1 8.2 34.9 Dion, Campbell, Letang are 3 contracts Im sure those teams would like to have back. Im sure even Boston would like to shed Chara and his contract right now. Weber and Suter at least have the benefit of time so that in 8 years when they are slowing down their respective cap hit compared to the overall cap should be smaller in comparison to what their body can produce. Gio at 4 yrs for 6 mil would be team friendly Gio at 4 years for 7 mil would be pretty fair Gio at 4 years for 8 mil would be player friendly Thats the starting points imo. Cap likely wont change much next couple years due to CDN dollar adjusting for any rise in overall revenue. If he wants more term or overall dollars then we can add retirement years to lower cap hit for the term of the contract. What we shouldnt do is pay him as a top 10 dman for the next 7 years because he wont be a top 10 dman for the next 7 years. In 4 years if he is still producing like that by all means give him another good contract but dont give term AND dollars and bet on Gio being that generational player like Lidstrom/Bourque that produces well into his late 30's.

You assume all blocked shots are intentional when they arent. At best you can assume that the flames would drop to a number closer to the bottom of the league which is probably Carolina at 380 BS from their D or Edmonton at 472 BS from their D. Calgary has 908 from their D. 908-380=528 extra shots 528*0.915=483 of those saved 528-483=45 extra goals against and puts Calgary at 217 GA or 5th last in the league. So yes, the Flames would drop quite a bit if they werent actively blocking the shots, but that is just one stat, you cant look at in a vacuum. If they arent blocking them, maybe they are using team speed to harass the shooters and pull the shot total down instead. Maybe they force the shooting team into worse shooting positions and as such the shooting efficiency of teams they play against goes down. Maybe instead of blocking the shot they are positioning themselves for rebounds or taking away the secondary shots more effectively resulting in higher puck possession. There are plenty of other angles to this. A high puck percentage team isnt likely to be a leader in shots blocked because they have the puck more often. Arguing over one stat doesnt serve any useful information when it is all dependant and leads into other factors.