Contracts, Cap, And Considerations

[s4xon]

Yes, I draw the line at 28 yrs old. Any older than that and they are likely to be on the downside of their contract when the team needs the cap space most. A top end player like Stastny at 28 getting 7M per year for 5 years and ending when he is 33 isnt a bad contract. You are essentially paying him for the last 5 years of his peak years.

Im not advocating giving any UFA we can find top dollar, Im saying lets not make money be the decider when trying to land those younger top end free agents this summer.

With the lower than expected cap and many teams under a contract crunch this year I can see some preferred teams or teams that are closer to a cup being able to match the dollars we put on the table.

 

Therein lies the issue of attracting FA's as well.  We've seen the last 3 years go by with very few vets signing with Calgary, even with a truckfull of money thrown at them.  Most of the deals have been hammered down with some sort of NTC/NMC involved, and again, I fully expect Burke and Yes Man to refrain from using them.

[FlamesLogic]

Therein lies the issue of attracting FA's as well.  We've seen the last 3 years go by with very few vets signing with Calgary, even with a truckfull of money thrown at them.  Most of the deals have been hammered down with some sort of NTC/NMC involved, and again, I fully expect Burke and Yes Man to refrain from using them.

The fact is we need to spend to get to the floor. I think we can attract some guys like Mark Fayne or Nikita Nikitin and offer them a) more money and more minutes.

The thing is we cant just target reasonable signings like that. We need to spend about a minimum of 12 million dollars this season on 2 forwards a backup G and a 4/5 dman. What form that takes Im not sure but my preference would be to target the young first time UFA's like Stastny like Callahan as my priority pickups. You never know what may or may not interest a player. Maybe Peter Stastny has told his kid that playing hockey in Canada is an experience you need to have as a player.

I do know that we can offer at least 3 factors in any negotiation

a) Role

money

c) canadian market (pro and con)

NMC or NTC are not something Im a fan of but depending on the wording they can be intrusive or inert.

[FlamesLogic]

The more I read up on Callahan the more likely I think it is that he wont be worth the UFA investment. 6.5M/year on a 3 year deal would be good but if its anything longer than that I think we got to be careful not to pay for another clarkson.

 

This report is pretty good info:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1942280-how-much-are-ryan-callahan-and-dan-girardi-worth-to-new-york-rangers#articles/1942280-how-much-are-ryan-callahan-and-dan-girardi-worth-to-new-york-rangers

 

The biggest knock seems to the style of game he plays at his size. Its more likely that he will showcase a downward trend earlier than larger players playing that physical big minute role.

This is probably a more prudent roster for next year:
http://www.capgeek.com/armchair-gm/roster/6490
Vanek is a true #1 winger in UFA and the guy is a mercenary as much as he is talented. Same age as moulson and younger than cammi so. Its older than I would want to target but its hard to find a guy that is a) worth getting big UFA dollars and will add something to the team.

In short if we get a good mid range dman (Fayne, Nikitin, etc) that can handle 20 mins a night, a vet backup goalie and pay for a top gun forward in UFA then the flames should a) get to the cap floor and take another step closer.

Under this format LW is the biggest need and we do need a guy that can push glenx down to the 2nd line to help bolster david jones who may be best as a 3rd line RW than a 2nd line RW.

Statsny is the top and only centre I would pursue in UFA for a top 6 role and I don't think Avs let him get to UFA.

So wish list in order: Vanek (7.5M per year), Moulson (5.5M per year), Cammi (4.5M per year) and really not much else out there fits after these 3.

After that you are looking more at 2nd line LW types to fight with glenx for top line minuntes.
Guys like Jussi Jokinen, Michalek and Mason Raymond.

Going that route does allow you to spend more on that new dman or backup goalie to get to cap floor but Im not sure adding Matt Niskanen or Andrew McDonald at 5M/year levels is a better investment as we need physical solid D more so than a offensive type.

[cross16]

The more I read up on Callahan the more likely I think it is that he wont be worth the UFA investment. 6.5M/year on a 3 year deal would be good but if its anything longer than that I think we got to be careful not to pay for another clarkson.

This report is pretty good info:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1942280-how-much-are-ryan-callahan-and-dan-girardi-worth-to-new-york-rangers#articles/1942280-how-much-are-ryan-callahan-and-dan-girardi-worth-to-new-york-rangers

The biggest knock seems to the style of game he plays at his size. Its more likely that he will showcase a downward trend earlier than larger players playing that physical big minute role.

This is probably a more prudent roster for next year:

http://www.capgeek.com/armchair-gm/roster/6490

Vanek is a true #1 winger in UFA and the guy is a mercenary as much as he is talented. Same age as moulson and younger than cammi so. Its older than I would want to target but its hard to find a guy that is a) worth getting big UFA dollars and will add something to the team.

In short if we get a good mid range dman (Fayne, Nikitin, etc) that can handle 20 mins a night, a vet backup goalie and pay for a top gun forward in UFA then the flames should a) get to the cap floor and take another step closer.

Under this format LW is the biggest need and we do need a guy that can push glenx down to the 2nd line to help bolster david jones who may be best as a 3rd line RW than a 2nd line RW.

Statsny is the top and only centre I would pursue in UFA for a top 6 role and I don't think Avs let him get to UFA.

So wish list in order: Vanek (7.5M per year), Moulson (5.5M per year), Cammi (4.5M per year) and really not much else out there fits after these 3.

After that you are looking more at 2nd line LW types to fight with glenx for top line minuntes.

Guys like Jussi Jokinen, Michalek and Mason Raymond.

Going that route does allow you to spend more on that new dman or backup goalie to get to cap floor but Im not sure adding Matt Niskanen or Andrew McDonald at 5M/year levels is a better investment as we need physical solid D more so than a offensive type.

I agree, Callahan is gojng to get brutally overpaid and IMO won't come here anyway but even if he did I'd pass. He's a contract you'll likely want rid of in a few years.

Neither macdonald or Niskanen are very physical Dman so if that is the goal, and I agree it should be, you need to look elsewhere. I think the flames best avenue to improve in thd offseason is going to come via trade.

[The_People1]

Therein lies the issue of attracting FA's as well.  We've seen the last 3 years go by with very few vets signing with Calgary, even with a truckfull of money thrown at them.  Most of the deals have been hammered down with some sort of NTC/NMC involved, and again, I fully expect Burke and Yes Man to refrain from using them.

 

That's why we need to tank and draft our own superstars.  It's very difficult to attract them via UFA and it's equally difficult to school a GM into a trade.  We will need high end assets to attract high end superstars.

[Flyerfan52]

That's why we need to tank and draft our own superstars.  It's very difficult to attract them via UFA and it's equally difficult to school a GM into a trade.  We will need high end assets to attract high end superstars.

That works well.

How many high end UFAs have signed on to a team with 3 of the last 4 #1 overall picks?

Lots of high end talent but superstars aren't requesting to be traded there. Go figure.

[robrob1974]

That works well.

How many high end UFAs have signed on to a team with 3 of the last 4 #1 overall picks?

Lots of high end talent but superstars aren't requesting to be traded there. Go figure.

 

Nobody goes to Edmonton because it's Edmonton. Where's the romance in Edmonton? It's in the butt boarding of nowhere!

[kehatch]

That works well.

How many high end UFAs have signed on to a team with 3 of the last 4 #1 overall picks?

Lots of high end talent but superstars aren't requesting to be traded there. Go figure.

 

Last time I checked Chicago and Pittsburgh weren't having any trouble attracting free agencies.  Your argument would be much more credible if you stopped cherry picking the worst team in the NHL.  Some draft based rebuilds work.  Some don't.  But Edmonton isn't losing because of their top picks as you continue to imply.  They are a mismanaged team in general.  There are plenty of examples of teams that have won with a number of top picks (in fact just about every Cup champion in modern history).  

 

You CAN'T win outside of the draft today.  And very few teams have the drafting talent (and luck) to draft the type of players we need without high picks.  

[s4xon]

That's why we need to tank and draft our own superstars.  It's very difficult to attract them via UFA and it's equally difficult to school a GM into a trade.  We will need high end assets to attract high end superstars.

 

(rolls eyes) ok, so the Flames tank 2 years in a row.  Get McDavid, and Sean Day.  Then all the FA's are going to be lining up to play in Calgary?  Awesome logic. 

 

Part of the recipe for attracting FA's is more than just having 'Superstars'.  A winning record, great coaching, and a top notch drafting system all come into play.  That means more than just the first overall pick.  Lots of cap space and ability to sign higher $$ deals helps as well.

 

A new building would be a great start.

[The_People1]

(rolls eyes) ok, so the Flames tank 2 years in a row.  Get McDavid, and Sean Day.  Then all the FA's are going to be lining up to play in Calgary?  Awesome logic. 

 

Part of the recipe for attracting FA's is more than just having 'Superstars'.  A winning record, great coaching, and a top notch drafting system all come into play.  That means more than just the first overall pick.  Lots of cap space and ability to sign higher $$ deals helps as well.

 

A new building would be a great start.

 

I wasn't referring to normal FA's.  I was referring to superstars specifically.

 

How do you think we will get superstars if we don't draft them ourselves? 

[s4xon]

I wasn't referring to normal FA's.  I was referring to superstars specifically.

 

How do you think we will get superstars if we don't draft them ourselves? 

 

Well, that's with any team; they draft their superstars.  Star trades are extremely rare.  But as has said before, there is no guarantee a 1/1 is going to be a superstar.  No matter how much you disagree that you can't use the Edmonton picks, you have to.  It's 3 overall 1/1's that haven't turned out.  Not 1, not 2, but 3.  

 

Flames will have to draft their Stars, much like the rest of the leauge.  However, as a resounding broken record, accepting a losing culture in the dressing room to get a few stars is more of a bandaid than a fix.  Edmonton proves that model.

 

Picking 2-5 and embedding a winning culture is always > tanking it and getting a 1/1.  You can't argue that Peeps.

 

If the blocks fall where they fall, and the Flames still get a 1/1 after a rigorous effort every night, then it's considered the icing on the cake.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

As for regular UFA's, a winning culture, an overall work ethic, and even a new building will attract them.  Having 3 1/1's won't.

[The_People1]

Well, that's with any team; they draft their superstars.  Star trades are extremely rare.  But as has said before, there is no guarantee a 1/1 is going to be a superstar.  No matter how much you disagree that you can't use the Edmonton picks, you have to.  It's 3 overall 1/1's that haven't turned out.  Not 1, not 2, but 3.  

 

Flames will have to draft their Stars, much like the rest of the leauge.  However, as a resounding broken record, accepting a losing culture in the dressing room to get a few stars is more of a bandaid than a fix.  Edmonton proves that model.

 

Picking 2-5 and embedding a winning culture is always > tanking it and getting a 1/1.  You can't argue that Peeps.

 

If the blocks fall where they fall, and the Flames still get a 1/1 after a rigorous effort every night, then it's considered the icing on the cake.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

As for regular UFA's, a winning culture, an overall work ethic, and even a new building will attract them.  Having 3 1/1's won't.

 

No, not every team drafts their superstars.  There are places, cities, teams, etc that if given a choice, superstars would rather go somewhere else even if it meant less money.  Regular FA's have little choice but superstars have lots of choices.

 

The Flames can build a team of regular FA's.  They can attract players like Hudler, Jones, Wideman, etc but even then, had to slightly overpay.  A team of regular FA's will be very regular.  Yes, it can compete for a playoff spot but when competing with other teams who have regular FA's accompanied by superstars, the team with superstars has the advantage.

 

And most importantly, after the Flames become a regular playoff team with regular players and lacking superstars, it will be too late to "tank" for them at that time.  We will wish we had one more game breaker to set us apart from the rest of the pack.  Look at the Flames roster now and look at fan expectations.  This is the time to tank it.  The team is so close, it would be disappointing to not go for it.  In a few years after the Flames come out of a rebuild, we may regret not investing the time and pain when the time was right.

[s4xon]

No, not every team drafts their superstars.  There are places, cities, teams, etc that if given a choice, superstars would rather go somewhere else even if it meant less money.  Regular FA's have little choice but superstars have lots of choices.

 

The Flames can build a team of regular FA's.  They can attract players like Hudler, Jones, Wideman, etc but even then, had to slightly overpay.  A team of regular FA's will be very regular.  Yes, it can compete for a playoff spot but when competing with other teams who have regular FA's accompanied by superstars, the team with superstars has the advantage.

 

And most importantly, after the Flames become a regular playoff team with regular players and lacking superstars, it will be too late to "tank" for them at that time.  We will wish we had one more game breaker to set us apart from the rest of the pack.  Look at the Flames roster now and look at fan expectations.  This is the time to tank it.  The team is so close, it would be disappointing to not go for it.  In a few years after the Flames come out of a rebuild, we may regret not investing the time and pain when the time was right.

 

So name a star player Chicago has attracted?  They've drafted Kane and Toews, and most their talent.  The same with Detroit.  Same with the Pens. Most the league has drafted their stars.  Superstar trades are very irregular.

 

So yeah, the Flames will have to draft their stars like the rest of the league.

 

You aren't understanding the throught process Peeps.  Tanking gets you a 1/1.  Great, so be it.  But then you end up with an Oiler mentality.  it's not worth the bandaid, nor the cancer in the locker room and through out the franchise. 

 

Chicago and Pitts didn't 'tank' it.  They tried night in and night out, but were ultimately rewarded because that's where the blocks fell.  Not because they intentionally thought Kane/Toews and Malkin/Crosby were their targets. 

 

The league handed the Pens Crosby, but that's besides the point.  The Flames will never be that lucky.  Another reason I don't put faith in drafting a 1/1 that will be the savior of the franchise. 

[The_People1]

So name a star player Chicago has attracted?  They've drafted Kane and Toews, and most their talent.  The same with Detroit.  Same with the Pens. Most the league has drafted their stars.  Superstar trades are very irregular.

 

So yeah, the Flames will have to draft their stars like the rest of the league.

 

You aren't understanding the throught process Peeps.  Tanking gets you a 1/1.  Great, so be it.  But then you end up with an Oiler mentality.  it's not worth the bandaid, nor the cancer in the locker room and through out the franchise. 

 

Chicago and Pitts didn't 'tank' it.  They tried night in and night out, but were ultimately rewarded because that's where the blocks fell.  Not because they intentionally thought Kane/Toews and Malkin/Crosby were their targets. 

 

The league handed the Pens Crosby, but that's besides the point.  The Flames will never be that lucky.  Another reason I don't put faith in drafting a 1/1 that will be the savior of the franchise. 

 

Chicago signed Marian Hossa and Brian Campbell to win the Cup.

Pittsburgh signed Sergei Gonchar to win the Cup.

Detroit signed Dominik Hasek and Brian Rafalski to win the Cup.

 

The Oilers also didn't try to "tank it".  They actually tried to win and failed. It's sad for anyone to think getting 1/1 means you also inherit Oiler mentality because teams have proven to draft 1/1 and made it out okay. ie. Kane, Stamkos,... actually virtually everyone non-Oiler.

[s4xon]

Chicago signed Marian Hossa and Brian Campbell to win the Cup.

Pittsburgh signed Sergei Gonchar to win the Cup.

Detroit signed Dominik Hasek and Brian Rafalski to win the Cup.

 

The Oilers also didn't try to "tank it".  They actually tried to win and failed. It's sad for anyone to think getting 1/1 means you also inherit Oiler mentality because teams have proven to draft 1/1 and made it out okay. ie. Kane, Stamkos,... actually virtually everyone non-Oiler.

 

Those aren't superstars Peeps.  You said you were talking about superstars above.  Those you've listed are just good FA's.

 

Ok then, so there goes your argument.  You've been saying that you prefer the Flames to pack it in.  Now here you are saying the OIlers didn't try to 'tank it' either.  I believe they did, but you are saying they didn't. 

 

So no other team in the league has packed it in and tried to 'tank it'.  If you are saying the Oilers haven't, which would be the #1 team in the league to connect earning 1/1's with tanking it, then why in the hell would you want the Flames to be the first team to do so then?

[Kulstad]

It's sad for anyone to think getting 1/1 means you also inherit Oiler mentality because teams have proven to draft 1/1 and made it out okay. ie. Kane, Stamkos,... actually virtually everyone non-Oiler.

 

Nobody thinks that LEGITIMATELY inheriting a 1/1 means that you also inherit Oiler mentality.  "Oops, looks like we end up getting 1/1 because *tee-hee* we lost so many games we ended up dead last" definitely opens that door, sets the table, invites you in for dinner and drinks.

[s4xon]

Peeps,

 

No one said drafting 1/1 = Oilers mentality. 

 

I'm saying tanking it to draft 1/1 = Oilers mentality.

 

Watch this interview with Taylor Hall : http://www.tsn.ca/VideoHub/?found=taylor%20hall&show=305424

 

He's full of excuses and pissed that he's not in the limelight.  You'll see why the Oilier mentality is just the type I don't want around the Flames. 

[The_People1]

Peeps,

 

No one said drafting 1/1 = Oilers mentality. 

 

I'm saying tanking it to draft 1/1 = Oilers mentality.

 

My apologies for the confusion then.  I was using "tanking to 1/1" and "drafting 1/1" interchangeably.

 

I just cheer for the Flames to draft 1/1.  That is all.  I'm cheering for the result, not so much the actions used to get there.

[s4xon]

My apologies for the confusion then.  I was using "tanking to 1/1" and "drafting 1/1" interchangeably.

 

I just cheer for the Flames to draft 1/1.  That is all.  I'm cheering for the result, not so much the actions used to get there.

 

Understandable.  I would love a 1/1 too.  If the blocks fall that way, then so be it.  If not, then it wasn't in the cards.

[Flyerfan52]

Last time I checked Chicago and Pittsburgh weren't having any trouble attracting free agencies.  Your argument would be much more credible if you stopped cherry picking the worst team in the NHL.  Some draft based rebuilds work.  Some don't.  But Edmonton isn't losing because of their top picks as you continue to imply.  They are a mismanaged team in general.  There are plenty of examples of teams that have won with a number of top picks (in fact just about every Cup champion in modern history).  

 

You CAN'T win outside of the draft today.  And very few teams have the drafting talent (and luck) to draft the type of players we need without high picks.  

The Wild got the 2 most sought UFAs last year.

They've drafted in the top 5 twice in their existance. Gaborik left as a UFA & you decide what you think of Pouliot.

[cross16]

The Wild got the 2 most sought UFAs last year.

They've drafted in the top 5 twice in their existance. Gaborik left as a UFA & you decide what you think of Pouliot.

Fair point, but k think this supports kehatchs point that yes you can get lucky but it's not the preferred way to build your team. Minnesota got extremely lucky that not k my where parise ad Sutet even available but that they wanted to come as a package deal. Tough to see that happening again and the wild are playing well right now but I would wait to see them in the playoffs before I put then up as a model.

I do agree though that you sit necessarily need the 1/1 to be a winner down the road. I do personally believe you need high picks because in the cap era star players come around in FA too infrequently and if you want several of them they are going to destroy your cap. Minny is going yk be on serious trouble next offseason when both granlund and Brodin need new deals.

[kehatch]

The Wild got the 2 most sought UFAs last year.

They've drafted in the top 5 twice in their existance. Gaborik left as a UFA & you decide what you think of Pouliot.

One example of an incredibly rare signing. And they haven't won anything.

I am not supportive of trying to lose, or cheering to lose. But drafting high is part of the cycle for most teams.

The Edmonton Oilers are the exception. Most great teams have had their turn in the dumps and the players they drafted are a key part of the success they are having.

[FlamesLogic]

criteria to win a stanley cup

a) young players contributing above their pay scale (usually because you drafted them)

veteran player(s) chasing last chance at cup

c) goalie standing on their head

d) core star players playing at their usually considerable cap levels

e) defense either constrictingly strong defensively or deadly offensively

f) entire team pulling in same direction

g) minimal injuries

to win the cup you need pretty much most things to go right at the right time, key is to make most of the right moves most of the time to give your team a shot at taking it all.

taking players via draft is just one part of the equation

[tmac70]

Hall is the prototypical reason of the troubles in EDM. After watching the interview, me and I is all you hear. Poor me. Did any one outside of EDM expect this guy on the Olympic team. please. He is a selfish defensive liability and he can't beleive he wasn't even on teams radar.  

 

Listen to Monahan or Toews do an interview or Poirier it is about TEAM not me or  I, it is there efforts to help the team. 

 

 

Peeps,

 

No one said drafting 1/1 = Oilers mentality. 

 

I'm saying tanking it to draft 1/1 = Oilers mentality.

 

Watch this interview with Taylor Hall : http://www.tsn.ca/VideoHub/?found=taylor%20hall&show=305424

 

He's full of excuses and pissed that he's not in the limelight.  You'll see why the Oilier mentality is just the type I don't want around the Flames. 

[s4xon]

Hall is the prototypical reason of the troubles in EDM. After watching the interview, me and I is all you hear. Poor me. Did any one outside of EDM expect this guy on the Olympic team. please. He is a selfish defensive liability and he can't beleive he wasn't even on teams radar.  

 

Listen to Monahan or Toews do an interview or Poirier it is about TEAM not me or  I, it is there efforts to help the team. 

 

yeah, it  is pretty bad.