travel_dude Posted June 8, 2016 Report Share Posted June 8, 2016 If they insist on signing him then I agree they should only do a 1 year deal. My main problem with Colborne is while I agree he helps you right now i'm not so sure he is going to help you, in relation to his salary, in 2-3 years time and I just think cap space is going to be so important to them at that point. comes down to whether or not you believe Colborne is or can be a top 6 forwrad. I don't, so i'm not in favor of a long term deal but if they are then it makes sense to sign. I just don't like the fit long term and it means you either have to trade him for next to nothing or even not qualify him I would go that route rather than get stuck with a bad arb award or forced into a long term deal. I think he is in the "show me" category this season. Bouma should have gotten a one-year deal, arbitration or not. You shouldn't get rewarded for 2 years of meh and one year of decent. A one-year deal would be ideal. You sign him for less than $3m (ideally > $2.5m) and he earns the next deal by showing he is more than a "end of season" player. He controls his next payday. It raises his value also as a trade chip, should we decide he doesn't fit the long term vision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kehatch Posted June 8, 2016 Report Share Posted June 8, 2016 If they insist on signing him then I agree they should only do a 1 year deal. My main problem with Colborne is while I agree he helps you right now i'm not so sure he is going to help you, in relation to his salary, in 2-3 years time and I just think cap space is going to be so important to them at that point. comes down to whether or not you believe Colborne is or can be a top 6 forwrad. I don't, so i'm not in favor of a long term deal but if they are then it makes sense to sign. I just don't like the fit long term and it means you either have to trade him for next to nothing or even not qualify him I would go that route rather than get stuck with a bad arb award or forced into a long term deal. I think Colborne is a fringe NHL player that only fits on a competitive team if at a budget salary that clears you cap to spend elsewhere. I think he is going to get around 3.2 in arbitration which removes his value. So I totally agree the Flames should walk. It's possible they can trade him and I think they should if they can. Maybe they can do something for another player in a similar situation of probably getting overpaid (ie Hayes). But it also possible they can't move him. In which case they have three options. Take the arbitration number at 1 year, take the arbitration number at 2 years, or sign him to a three year deal to try and get value out of the contract. In that scenario I hope for option 1 but fear option 3. They were in the exact same situation with Bouma which is why I think they ended up in a bad contract At this point I don't think I would even qualify Colborne and risk the arbitration case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted June 8, 2016 Report Share Posted June 8, 2016 I think Colborne is a fringe NHL player that only fits on a competitive team if at a budget salary that clears you cap to spend elsewhere. I think he is going to get around 3.2 in arbitration which removes his value. So I totally agree the Flames should walk. It's possible they can trade him and I think they should if they can. Maybe they can do something for another player in a similar situation of probably getting overpaid (ie Hayes). But it also possible they can't move him. In which case they have three options. Take the arbitration number at 1 year, take the arbitration number at 2 years, or sign him to a three year deal to try and get value out of the contract. In that scenario I hope for option 1 but fear option 3. They were in the exact same situation with Bouma which is why I think they ended up in a bad contract At this point I don't think I would even qualify Colborne and risk the arbitration case. I may be mistaken, but if you don't QO a player, doesn't he become a UFA? I will preface this by saying I don't have a problem with Colborne at a reasonable contract value. He has some tools that may not have been used properly. Hayes would be a solid trade, as he brings back a player in a position we need (RW), for a player that hasn't done well on RW. At least I feel he hasn't. Hayes is coming out of a ELC, so would be cheaper to sign. NY got him for nothing, so a versatile player coming back would be a reasonable return. I don't believe he is going to get $3m+ from the Flames. That might prevent a deal, but I think it's reasonable. Another trade option would be Bouma for Hayes. A known contract value for a RFA. Bouma may not have the scoring that NY would prefer, but he gives them a toughness that Hayes doesn;t bring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob1974 Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 I've always seen Colborne as a fill in guy while the team rebuilds. Maybe he's a good 3rd line left winger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 I may be mistaken, but if you don't QO a player, doesn't he become a UFA? Correct so you would lose him for nothing. However you can still negotiate with him as a UFA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cccsberg Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 I think Colborne is a fringe NHL player that only fits on a competitive team if at a budget salary that clears you cap to spend elsewhere. I think he is going to get around 3.2 in arbitration which removes his value. So I totally agree the Flames should walk. It's possible they can trade him and I think they should if they can. Maybe they can do something for another player in a similar situation of probably getting overpaid (ie Hayes). But it also possible they can't move him. In which case they have three options. Take the arbitration number at 1 year, take the arbitration number at 2 years, or sign him to a three year deal to try and get value out of the contract. In that scenario I hope for option 1 but fear option 3. They were in the exact same situation with Bouma which is why I think they ended up in a bad contract At this point I don't think I would even qualify Colborne and risk the arbitration case. A fringe NHLer with 15-20 goals? Right. This whole Colborne discussion is so biased with prejudice it's not even worth joining in. He's a good middle 6 NHLer. If the Flames don't want that or can't afford it, so be it.... A trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kehatch Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 A fringe NHLer with 15-20 goals? Right. This whole Colborne discussion is so biased with prejudice it's not even worth joining in. He's a good middle 6 NHLer. If the Flames don't want that or can't afford it, so be it.... A trade. Nigel Dawes scored 14 twice. Bouma put up 16 last season. If Colborne can keep it up then great. But he is going to be paid to out up those numbers and I don't think he will keep it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 Nigel Dawes scored 14 twice. Bouma put up 16 last season. If Colborne can keep it up then great. But he is going to be paid to out up those numbers and I don't think he will keep it up. I think what has to enter the evaluation is where does management see Colborne's position within a growing situation. You can't or shouldn't simply default to market statistics for paying your players. Agents will go directly to those numbers of course but management has the choice to play their game or their own. Obviously the money you pay bottom 6 forwards is as important as what you pay the top dawgs in the whole scheme of things. I may be mistaken, but if you don't QO a player, doesn't he become a UFA? I will preface this by saying I don't have a problem with Colborne at a reasonable contract value. He has some tools that may not have been used properly. Hayes would be a solid trade, as he brings back a player in a position we need (RW), for a player that hasn't done well on RW. At least I feel he hasn't. Hayes is coming out of a ELC, so would be cheaper to sign. NY got him for nothing, so a versatile player coming back would be a reasonable return. I don't believe he is going to get $3m+ from the Flames. That might prevent a deal, but I think it's reasonable. Another trade option would be Bouma for Hayes. A known contract value for a RFA. Bouma may not have the scoring that NY would prefer, but he gives them a toughness that Hayes doesn;t bring. Bouma for Hayes on a 1 year deal would be worth a look for us. If BT is not going to go for someone such as Brouwer over a 4 year deal the auditions need to continue for RW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 I think what has to enter the evaluation is where does management see Colborne's position within a growing situation. You can't or shouldn't simply default to market statistics for paying your players. Agents will go directly to those numbers of course but management has the choice to play their game or their own. Obviously the money you pay bottom 6 forwards is as important as what you pay the top dawgs in the whole scheme of things. Bouma for Hayes on a 1 year deal would be worth a look for us. If BT is not going to go for someone such as Brouwer over a 4 year deal the auditions need to continue for RW. There is speculation Brouwer will be a 5 year deal in the 5-7m range. Crazy talk. I don't think there is any way for us to fit him in, even if we moved all bad salaries out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 Too many comments to quote, so ill just summarize. I should clarify, I like Colborne. His game has come a long way. If we didnt need cap room, id have no issues giving him 2.5, but I feel he is what he is. Hes a bargain center playing wing. You definitely need to qualify him, but that only takes about 1.5 I believe. Bottom line you can get a better player for less than what Colborne will sign for. My knocks are , hes soft, he doesnt drive play, he doesnt consistently score important goals. Bouma, at least has the ability to affect a game without scoring a goal. I think you can even put Bouma in Colbornes place and improve the line. Kevin Hayes will make less than Joe next year, and I think would be a better player for us. Bottom line (for me) is I think we have seen the best of Joe. I think Joe is a good player, but not a 3M player.unfornately hes a cap victim too. I wish we had one more to see what we have in Pribyl , and others but we dont. If we can talk him into a Max 2m 1 yr deal im all over it, but its clear hes not a core piece, and non core pieces get replaced when they get too expensive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 Since he graduated to pro I've noticed that when his workload goes up his GAA does as well while his SV% drops. He can start a few games in a row if necessary but isn't the guy you want starting the majority. Thanks! I went and looked deeper and you are correct, awesome point. I wonder how hed do in a platoon? I cant help thinking the hidden secret out there is Enroth.always played well, the only reason he was shipped out of buffalo was because he was hurting their run at Mcdavid, but hes also another one im not sure is a 60 game guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 There is speculation Brouwer will be a 5 year deal in the 5-7m range. Crazy talk. I don't think there is any way for us to fit him in, even if we moved all bad salaries out. I have said before the deal would have to be similar to Frolik's deal and not sure I would do 5 years. You never know with FA and until he signs elsewhere I wouldn't rule him out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 Too many comments to quote, so ill just summarize. I should clarify, I like Colborne. His game has come a long way. If we didnt need cap room, id have no issues giving him 2.5, but I feel he is what he is. Hes a bargain center playing wing. You definitely need to qualify him, but that only takes about 1.5 I believe. Bottom line you can get a better player for less than what Colborne will sign for. My knocks are , hes soft, he doesnt drive play, he doesnt consistently score important goals. Bouma, at least has the ability to affect a game without scoring a goal. I think you can even put Bouma in Colbornes place and improve the line. Kevin Hayes will make less than Joe next year, and I think would be a better player for us. Bottom line (for me) is I think we have seen the best of Joe. I think Joe is a good player, but not a 3M player.unfornately hes a cap victim too. I wish we had one more to see what we have in Pribyl , and others but we dont. If we can talk him into a Max 2m 1 yr deal im all over it, but its clear hes not a core piece, and non core pieces get replaced when they get too expensive Wait and see is my approach only because Joe wants to be part of the core here. The key is keeping him affordable and the expectations real with him. I think he has better hockey sense than many give him credit for and he does seem to grow with the experience each year. You hate to keep trading or throwing this away. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 I have said before the deal would have to be similar to Frolik's deal and not sure I would do 5 years. You never know with FA and until he signs elsewhere I wouldn't rule him out. I only say that because there are too many teams needing this type of player. EDM will pay more than we can afford. Dallas would love him. Teams in the East need him. Frolik had a limited group of teams that really wanted him. WPG made the mistake of not signing him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 I only say that because there are too many teams needing this type of player. EDM will pay more than we can afford. Dallas would love him. Teams in the East need him. Frolik had a limited group of teams that really wanted him. WPG made the mistake of not signing him. I will hold onto my hope for Brouwer, he could be the Leader we need for this forward group and the style of hockey we need to play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowtownguy Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 Hayes would be a solid trade, as he brings back a player in a position we need (RW), for a player that hasn't done well on RW. At least I feel he hasn't. Hayes is coming out of a ELC, so would be cheaper to sign. NY got him for nothing, so a versatile player coming back would be a reasonable return. I don't believe he is going to get $3m+ from the Flames. That might prevent a deal, but I think it's reasonable. Another trade option would be Bouma for Hayes. A known contract value for a RFA. Bouma may not have the scoring that NY would prefer, but he gives them a toughness that Hayes doesn;t bring. I would not make that trade because he does not want to be in Calgary. Conroy already sweet talked him two years ago and he chose NY over Calgary. Even JH tried to pull him here. I would be concerned that he would not bring his best game to the Flames. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kehatch Posted June 9, 2016 Report Share Posted June 9, 2016 I would not make that trade because he does not want to be in Calgary. Conroy already sweet talked him two years ago and he chose NY over Calgary. Even JH tried to pull him here. I would be concerned that he would not bring his best game to the Flames. It's a big leap between choosing to play for the Rangers to him not wanting to play in Calgary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted June 10, 2016 Report Share Posted June 10, 2016 I would not make that trade because he does not want to be in Calgary. Conroy already sweet talked him two years ago and he chose NY over Calgary. Even JH tried to pull him here. I would be concerned that he would not bring his best game to the Flames. CGY was on the short list, so I don't know why you think he didn't want to play here. He was offered a NHL roster spot without ever having skated in a practice. As well, the move was a couple of hundred miles for a kid that grew up and went to college in Boston. If anything, he would play his butt off to impress. He would kill to play on Johnny's line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted June 10, 2016 Report Share Posted June 10, 2016 CGY was on the short list, so I don't know why you think he didn't want to play here. He was offered a NHL roster spot without ever having skated in a practice. As well, the move was a couple of hundred miles for a kid that grew up and went to college in Boston. If anything, he would play his butt off to impress. He would kill to play on Johnny's line. If true he would have signed in Calgary 2 years ago & if he was that good he'd be with Gaudreau now rather then a 3rd liner. Monahan seems to be doing just fine centering JH & the 2 seem to get along pretty well off ice as well. Hayes probably wants a raise for his 36 & 45 point seasons so I'd trade F/A for his RFA rights. If NYR re-signed him to a cap friendly contract I'd look @ him but the Rags need cap friendly decent players more than we do. Hayes doesn't fill a need. Get over the romantic notion that ex-linemates in little league will be magic. It makes as much sense as the idea having 2 brothers (or players by accident of birth coming from the same country) on the same team = magic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StarkRaving Posted June 10, 2016 Report Share Posted June 10, 2016 If true he would have signed in Calgary 2 years ago & if he was that good he'd be with Gaudreau now rather then a 3rd liner. Monahan seems to be doing just fine centering JH & the 2 seem to get along pretty well off ice as well. Hayes probably wants a raise for his 36 & 45 point seasons so I'd trade F/A for his RFA rights. If NYR re-signed him to a cap friendly contract I'd look @ him but the Rags need cap friendly decent players more than we do. Hayes doesn't fill a need. Get over the romantic notion that ex-linemates in little league will be magic. It makes as much sense as the idea having 2 brothers (or players by accident of birth coming from the same country) on the same team = magic. Thank you! This is something that always drives me batty. Some people have a notion that the Leafs would pay a premium so Alex and William Nylander can play together. Others think the Leafs would pay a similar premium so that Tkachuk could be re-united with Marner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted June 10, 2016 Report Share Posted June 10, 2016 If true he would have signed in Calgary 2 years ago & if he was that good he'd be with Gaudreau now rather then a 3rd liner. Monahan seems to be doing just fine centering JH & the 2 seem to get along pretty well off ice as well. Hayes probably wants a raise for his 36 & 45 point seasons so I'd trade F/A for his RFA rights. If NYR re-signed him to a cap friendly contract I'd look @ him but the Rags need cap friendly decent players more than we do. Hayes doesn't fill a need. Get over the romantic notion that ex-linemates in little league will be magic. It makes as much sense as the idea having 2 brothers (or players by accident of birth coming from the same country) on the same team = magic. You forget that Hayes played on RW at BC, so he does fill a need for a top 9 RW. In NY he was used a lot at center. I don't have some notion that he would be a world beater with Johnny. I said he would work his butt off to get the chance. Arnold has not lived up to the hype he had with Johnny, so I don't think the BC connection matters to how well they could play. What I see as an option is a bigger RW, that had initial success in the NHL. He's had two reasonable seasons in the NHL, 45 and 36 points. What we have now is Frolik and a bunch of guys that don't excel on RW. I have no beliefs that two players from the same country = gold, or two brothers are magic (ie Hamilton's). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted June 10, 2016 Report Share Posted June 10, 2016 If true he would have signed in Calgary 2 years ago & if he was that good he'd be with Gaudreau now rather then a 3rd liner. Monahan seems to be doing just fine centering JH & the 2 seem to get along pretty well off ice as well. Hayes probably wants a raise for his 36 & 45 point seasons so I'd trade F/A for his RFA rights. If NYR re-signed him to a cap friendly contract I'd look @ him but the Rags need cap friendly decent players more than we do. Hayes doesn't fill a need. Get over the romantic notion that ex-linemates in little league will be magic. It makes as much sense as the idea having 2 brothers (or players by accident of birth coming from the same country) on the same team = magic. I disagree he doesnt fill a need, but you are correct it hinges in how much their next contracts are. I think Hayes signs for less, in which case I think you get an upgraded version of Joe for less.. plus he's a natural RW but i totally agree chemistry doesn't always follow , otherwise Bill Arnold would have been up a long time ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted June 10, 2016 Report Share Posted June 10, 2016 I disagree he doesnt fill a need, but you are correct it hinges in how much their next contracts are. I think Hayes signs for less, in which case I think you get an upgraded version of Joe for less.. plus he's a natural RW but i totally agree chemistry doesn't always follow , otherwise Bill Arnold would have been up a long time ago Any deal for Hayes would or should be on a 1 year deal to see what he does for us. I would say you are buying into proven paid production as of yet. We do need to fatten up our RW pipeline but I wouldn't use Colborne to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kehatch Posted June 10, 2016 Report Share Posted June 10, 2016 I don't want Hayes because he played with Gaudreau. But a 24 year old 6'5" winger thst can play either side certainly fits a need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted June 10, 2016 Report Share Posted June 10, 2016 http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthread.php?t=154997 There..goaltending problem solved.. We can move on to the next topic now. In all seriousness, I like the idea..find a possible prospect, put him on the farm and see what he can do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now