UFA 2020, Who’d You Sign?

[Thebrewcrew]

I think Jonas Brodin signing for 42 million, really hurts the Flames chances of keeping Brodie. Brodin is 3 years younger, but Brodie is a superior player. Would have to think his ask starts with a 6, even if it's not on a 7 year term. 

[cross16]

I am a big Brodie fan but I do not think he is the superior player. His offense is superior but Brodin is one of, and you could argue thee, best defensive dman in the league. He is a black hole for offense in terms of shot suppression, scoring chance reduction etc. 

 

Brodie is good but not at Brodin's level. Given the age different I don't suspect this will wind up as a good comp for Brodie. 

 

To be fair I'm also of the belief Brodie is already out of the door and will not be a Flame next year. 

[travel_dude]

16 hours ago, cross16 said:

I am a big Brodie fan but I do not think he is the superior player. His offense is superior but Brodin is one of, and you could argue thee, best defensive dman in the league. He is a black hole for offense in terms of shot suppression, scoring chance reduction etc. 

 

Brodie is good but not at Brodin's level. Given the age different I don't suspect this will wind up as a good comp for Brodie. 

 

To be fair I'm also of the belief Brodie is already out of the door and will not be a Flame next year. 

 

Yeah, I think they had early talks and nothing came of it.

Considering how the rumors are unfolding, I tend to agree with you.

Not that big of a surprise, since I think they felt the top pair could stand improvement.

 

[robrob74]

The fact the Flames need to revamp the first pair, and Andersson emerging as a bonafide  #3/4, that leaves Brodie out. But he’s a guy that can play up and eat minutes so I don’t mind him, but would like an upgrade.

[The_People1]

8 hours ago, robrob74 said:

The fact the Flames need to revamp the first pair, and Andersson emerging as a bonafide  #3/4, that leaves Brodie out. But he’s a guy that can play up and eat minutes so I don’t mind him, but would like an upgrade.

 

I think we would all want Brodie back on a two year deal for $6-mil.  That's the best case for us.  Brodie can carry Giordano for two years and it buys us time to stock up some RHS RD.  Right now the cupboards are bare and we are really exposed on RD.

[jjgallow]

8 hours ago, robrob74 said:

The fact the Flames need to revamp the first pair, and Andersson emerging as a bonafide  #3/4, that leaves Brodie out. But he’s a guy that can play up and eat minutes so I don’t mind him, but would like an upgrade.

 

Andersson has been a bright light and one of the very few counter-arguements to "blow it up".    Not enough on its own, imho.   But notable all the same.   Brodie I am pretty neutral on.    

[ABC923]

I wonder if the flames have an internal cap like many other teams this year. It could really limit what the team does.

[travel_dude]

8 hours ago, ABC923 said:

I wonder if the flames have an internal cap like many other teams this year. It could really limit what the team does.

 

During the worst years for oil, this team was spending to the cap and making buyouts.

[sak22]

34 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

During the worst years for oil, this team was spending to the cap and making buyouts.

Gate revenue covers basically 3/4 of player expenses.  The potential elimination of that leads to a definite loss as tv and sponsorships alone will not cover expenses, so that leads to how much are they willing to lose this year, with the oil industry not looking into a rebound any time soon, the other teams shut down, potential of reductions in sponsorships, and costs for the new arena starting to enter the equation.  In the past they kept up the spending because the team was at least still turning a slight profit, I'm not seeing a profit next year for them.

 

I could see them going either way on the cap, but there are also a great number of season ticket holders who are at their threshold for spending, and unlike 10 years ago the list to replace us is quite small.

[cross16]

It does not sounds like the flames plan on curbing spending on players. With the shared revenue model the NHL has reduction in revenue will be somewhat offset by the increased escrow the players will pay back so it's not like the owners will be left holding the bag. 

 

I would suspect the Flames will continue to spend to the cap if necessary but I do wonder if ownership may get a little more involved on the contracts and potentially veto longer term commitments or specific salary structures. 

[robrob74]

6 hours ago, sak22 said:

Gate revenue covers basically 3/4 of player expenses.  The potential elimination of that leads to a definite loss as tv and sponsorships alone will not cover expenses, so that leads to how much are they willing to lose this year, with the oil industry not looking into a rebound any time soon, the other teams shut down, potential of reductions in sponsorships, and costs for the new arena starting to enter the equation.  In the past they kept up the spending because the team was at least still turning a slight profit, I'm not seeing a profit next year for them.

 

I could see them going either way on the cap, but there are also a great number of season ticket holders who are at their threshold for spending, and unlike 10 years ago the list to replace us is quite small.

 

this would be a great time to go rebuild. It looks like the Wild might be thinking rebuild as they retool. The Flames are middle or a bit more on the plus than negative side of things so it is a tough call. 
 

I dunno how many would do a pay per view or a channel price like center ice or something like that, to try make up the price? 
 

maybe the NHL gets super stringent on how many devices you can use with a membership. 

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

 

this would be a great time to go rebuild. 

 

Perfect time to rebuild.  Attendance won't be back to normal until a vaccine that's safe... Like a full year from now or two.

[robrob74]

1 minute ago, The_People1 said:

 

Perfect time to rebuild.  Attendance won't be back to normal until a vaccine that's safe... Like a full year from now or two.

 

 

It's too bad that money makes the world go around because this virus has made it obvious that it's not as important than it is. Although, the need for it is even more prevalent. But it would be a great time to rebuild and be ready for an up and coming team when the stadium is built, and things are back to normal. 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

 

 

It's too bad that money makes the world go around because this virus has made it obvious that it's not as important than it is. Although, the need for it is even more prevalent. But it would be a great time to rebuild and be ready for an up and coming team when the stadium is built, and things are back to normal. 

 

I don't want to sound callous, but without business there is no social programs.

We can't survive with all busness shut down until we develop a cure.

It's funny but we have gone from 3 feet/no mask to 6 feet/no mask to masks recommended to 6 feet and masks.

The land border to the US is closed, but the air border is wide open.

Point is that even if a vaccine is available, there will still be those that bring it in and ignore any laws or ways to contain it.

It's not a mystery that provinces with international airports have the most new cases.

 

 

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

It's funny but we have gone from 3 feet/no mask to 6 feet/no mask to masks recommended to 6 feet and masks.

 

 

Well, just a small chronological clarification,

 

First our governments told us this really wasn't a big deal and was under control, and no precautions were needed unless travelling to Wuhan.

 

Then they said the Virus Definitely wasn't airborne, and that there was absolutely no reason to wear a mask.

 

Then they said masks were "Only effective when worn by health professionals"

 

Then THIS happened

 

 

 

There is no amount of sarcasm that can ever compare with how ridiculous factual events are.

 

ok.....I just needed reason to post that lol

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, jjgallow said:

ok.....I just needed reason to post that lol

 

I hate to say it but I think Tam is a nutbar.

[jjgallow]

9 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I hate to say it but I think Tam is a nutbar.

 

You could have said worse and still been accurate

[The_People1]

If ownership is worried no one will come to the games during a rebuild, then they don't have to worry about the next two years.  No one is allowed to come to the games anyways.

 

We don't need a scorched earth rebuild because we have young depth.  Just trade Giordano, Backlund, Gaudreau, and Monahan for high picks or prospects.

[The_People1]

17 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 Just trade Giordano, Backlund, Gaudreau, and Monahan for high picks or prospects.

 

I would add the assets coming back or that we draft have to be RHS C/RW/RD (or G).  Otherwise we back to square one and the retool would have been a waste of time.

[jjgallow]

20 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

If ownership is worried no one will come to the games during a rebuild, then they don't have to worry about the next two years.  No one is allowed to come to the games anyways.

 

We don't need a scorched earth rebuild because we have young depth.  Just trade Giordano, Backlund, Gaudreau, and Monahan for high picks or prospects.

1 minute ago, The_People1 said:

 

I would add the assets coming back or that we draft have to be RHS C/RW/RD (or G).  Otherwise we back to square one and the retool would have been a waste of time.

 

100%.   Sadly I think they'll try to keep things going and we'll have a much deeper, later rebuild.  But I still have hope.

 

BTW I still think if a LHS is BPA, you take him.   But RHS is factored into that equation.   I Would however trade picks up to target specific RHS assets (this year I'd be speaking of Askarov)....and yeah you can always trade for RHS after but it gets harder and harder the more the prospects develop.

 

*I wouldn't trade a pick down to get a RHS. 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

If ownership is worried no one will come to the games during a rebuild, then they don't have to worry about the next two years.  No one is allowed to come to the games anyways.

 

We don't need a scorched earth rebuild because we have young depth.  Just trade Giordano, Backlund, Gaudreau, and Monahan for high picks or prospects.

 

The NHL is going to look at the way the NFL is going with limited capacity in the stands.  Right now, it sounds crazy.  Come December 1st, the landscape may look a lot different.  Hockey fans are a starved breed.  You think they won't go to a game if they have the chance?  The biggest hurdle for the NHL for next season is the 14 day isolation period for players and staff coming from the US.    

[cross16]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

The NHL is going to look at the way the NFL is going with limited capacity in the stands.  Right now, it sounds crazy.  Come December 1st, the landscape may look a lot different.  Hockey fans are a starved breed.  You think they won't go to a game if they have the chance?  The biggest hurdle for the NHL for next season is the 14 day isolation period for players and staff coming from the US.    

 

Hard to say because for the NHL that's more of a cost benefits analysis of what does it cost them to open the arena and run them vs what they take in via revenues. The NFL's TV deal alone gives each franchise enough money to spend right to the cap so their gate revenue is almost a bonus. That's not the same situation the NHL is in so they could actually lose more money by having fans in the stands depending on what standard of social distancing is in place. 

 

not to mention having teams in Canada with stricter laws than the US provides another challenge. Would be interesting to see. 

[Thebrewcrew]

 

[The_People1]

5 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

100%.   Sadly I think they'll try to keep things going and we'll have a much deeper, later rebuild.  But I still have hope.

 

Of course they will.  It's the Flames.

 

Rebuild will happen after even the depth has aged beyond worth.

[The_People1]

4 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

The NHL is going to look at the way the NFL is going with limited capacity in the stands.  Right now, it sounds crazy.  Come December 1st, the landscape may look a lot different.  Hockey fans are a starved breed.  You think they won't go to a game if they have the chance?  The biggest hurdle for the NHL for next season is the 14 day isolation period for players and staff coming from the US.    

 

Right.  So rebuild.  Limited attendance either way.