2024 Free Agency

[Thebrewcrew]

Couple weeks until Free Agency opens.

 

Retool/rebuild is really a matter of semantics. It's clear though that the Flames aren't completely stripping the roster. I can agree with that. You need veterans to insulate the youth. I think the Flames will make two signings. I think they'll sign a forward and a D. I expect that the Flames will add a winger. Right now they have too many wingers, but I think they're selling Mangiapane, Kuzmenko and possible Sharangovich (if no extension is done) in the 24/25 season. They'll need NHL bodies. The blueline is pretty clear and obvious. They really only have two NHL D. Some targets

 

Some players I think the Flames will target.

 

Oliver Kylington- kinda obvious. He wouldn't be at the top of my list. I have a hard time finding the sweet spot in terms of term/AAV. He likely wants a raise. I would have a hard time giving him one. Hardly played at all on his 5 mill contract. He's also really only had one good season, which will be three years ago in the fall. I would circle back on day two of UFA, if he's still available.

 

Jake DeBrusk- this has been loosely "rumoured". I think you would get pretty good value on a DeBrusk deal, he's a very youg UFA. This isn't a retirement deal. He will be 28 for the entirety of the first year of the deal. Depending on term, it probably costs 30-35 million. Maybe the player wants to be close to home.

 

Anthony Duclair- This has been speculated for two years. Is he the Huberdeau fixer? I doubt it. Really good player though. Two years older than DeBrusk, Duclair will be 29 for the first year of his deal. He's a player that has played for EIGHT teams! He's also only made 12mill. This is where I would be concerned. This feels like a situation where the player ends up wherever the longest term and most dollars are. Most UFA's end up that way, but this seems like Exhibit A.

 

Chandler Stephenson- Makes sense on the surface. Flames need centres, Stephenson is from Sask. This will be a scary contract. A 30yr old, that has been on two cup winners and only made 10million in his career. Fortunately, I think the Flames will be outbid.

 

Matt Grzelcyk- He's coming off a bad season. Pretty good puck-mover. Wonder if there's an opportunity to go shorter term, bigger money here. Rebuild some value and flip to a contender. 

 

Honorable mentions would be Joel Edmundson and Brenden Dillon. Get a little bit harder to play against on the backend. 

[robrob74]

The rumour sites are saying there is mutual interest between Debrusk and the Flames. I've never really seen him play, just heard rumours or conversation for years about Calgary being a fit... some years he has seemed underperforming. Not sure what to think. 
 

it is good to have some vets, good to have spots kids can aspire to. Good to have competition. Good to do a lot of things. Good to have cap space to do them.

[sak22]

4 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

The rumour sites are saying there is mutual interest between Debrusk and the Flames. I've never really seen him play, just heard rumours or conversation for years about Calgary being a fit... some years he has seemed underperforming. Not sure what to think. 
 

it is good to have some vets, good to have spots kids can aspire to. Good to have competition. Good to do a lot of things. Good to have cap space to do them.

I think he's probably a Mange replacement and has up and down production, not getting much younger there.  I guess it all depends on term, but one way or another it doesn't move the needle.  If the ship is sinking he won't keep it afloat, if the goal is winning he won't be a big factor.  

[cross16]

Big picture I dont think Debrusk make sense. He isn’t a difference maker nor is he going to change the fortunes of where this team is going. I don’t think he’s value is going be great so he’ll get overpaid. 
 

from a more micro lens I can see it. I do think Mang is a strong candidate to get moved this summer so Debrusk keeps that position solid and gets the flames more physical, which I think both Conroy and Huska want. So you get a skill set you desire, similar production and gain the assets you’ll get for trading Mang. 
 

it’s not what I would do but there’s logic behind the target 

[tmac70]

7 hours ago, sak22 said:

I think he's probably a Mange replacement and has up and down production, not getting much younger there.  I guess it all depends on term, but one way or another it doesn't move the needle.  If the ship is sinking he won't keep it afloat, if the goal is winning he won't be a big factor.  

Debrusk is an upgrade over Mags at the value that Mags is making. Now is he the one missing piece of course not but he will be more of a factor when it comes to board battles and net-front presence. 

[tmac70]

9 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Couple weeks until Free Agency opens.

 

Retool/rebuild is really a matter of semantics. It's clear though that the Flames aren't completely stripping the roster. I can agree with that. You need veterans to insulate the youth. I think the Flames will make two signings. I think they'll sign a forward and a D. I expect that the Flames will add a winger. Right now they have too many wingers, but I think they're selling Mangiapane, Kuzmenko and possible Sharangovich (if no extension is done) in the 24/25 season. They'll need NHL bodies. The blueline is pretty clear and obvious. They really only have two NHL D. Some targets

 

Some players I think the Flames will target.

 

Oliver Kylington- kinda obvious. He wouldn't be at the top of my list. I have a hard time finding the sweet spot in terms of term/AAV. He likely wants a raise. I would have a hard time giving him one. Hardly played at all on his 5 mill contract. He's also really only had one good season, which will be three years ago in the fall. I would circle back on day two of UFA, if he's still available.

 

Jake DeBrusk- this has been loosely "rumoured". I think you would get pretty good value on a DeBrusk deal, he's a very youg UFA. This isn't a retirement deal. He will be 28 for the entirety of the first year of the deal. Depending on term, it probably costs 30-35 million. Maybe the player wants to be close to home.

 

Anthony Duclair- This has been speculated for two years. Is he the Huberdeau fixer? I doubt it. Really good player though. Two years older than DeBrusk, Duclair will be 29 for the first year of his deal. He's a player that has played for EIGHT teams! He's also only made 12mill. This is where I would be concerned. This feels like a situation where the player ends up wherever the longest term and most dollars are. Most UFA's end up that way, but this seems like Exhibit A.

 

Chandler Stephenson- Makes sense on the surface. Flames need centres, Stephenson is from Sask. This will be a scary contract. A 30yr old, that has been on two cup winners and only made 10million in his career. Fortunately, I think the Flames will be outbid.

 

Matt Grzelcyk- He's coming off a bad season. Pretty good puck-mover. Wonder if there's an opportunity to go shorter term, bigger money here. Rebuild some value and flip to a contender. 

 

Honorable mentions would be Joel Edmundson and Brenden Dillon. Get a little bit harder to play against on the backend. 

As its speculative, I actually don't mind the Debrusk, Stephenson, Edmundson play. With Chandler and Edmundson you have guys that have won Stanley cups.  If you want to build a championship team we need guys that know what it takes to get to the next level. Their experience and knowledge and mentorship IMHO is invaluable to development of the younger guys. 

[420since1974]

I will be happy if Calgary does not sign any UFAs to long term contracts.

I realize that means that the Flames will get out bid for most of the available UFAs, but I'm fine with that.

I want Calgary to have Cap Space to weaponize it for a couple of seasons.

[travel_dude]

40 minutes ago, 420since1974 said:

I will be happy if Calgary does not sign any UFAs to long term contracts.

I realize that means that the Flames will get out bid for most of the available UFAs, but I'm fine with that.

I want Calgary to have Cap Space to weaponize it for a couple of seasons.

 

I think the increase this year to something like $88M will give teams breathing room.  I was a little disappointed with the returns this year for taking on cap in trades at TDL.  A 4th?  A 5th?  In some cases, the team taking the cap had to even give up a player/prospect or rights just to get that.

Dumba and a 7th gets you a 5th?  Zucker for a 5th?  

 

I get the idea of weaponizing it, but I just haven't seen enough of it being worth the money.

 

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I think the increase this year to something like $88M will give teams breathing room.  I was a little disappointed with the returns this year for taking on cap in trades at TDL.  A 4th?  A 5th?  In some cases, the team taking the cap had to even give up a player/prospect or rights just to get that.

Dumba and a 7th gets you a 5th?  Zucker for a 5th?  

 

I get the idea of weaponizing it, but I just haven't seen enough of it being worth the money.

 

 

The odd time, BT gave up a 1st round pick to get rid of Monahan.  The worst trade in NHL history but other than that, ya it's been 3rds and 4ths to eat cap.

[Thebrewcrew]

This wouldn't be a bad year to be quiet on the opening day of free agency.

 

This is the first significant cap jump since 2018. 2019 had a jump, but not as high as expected. 

 

I think there are going to be some real mistakes made on the 1st. 

[cross16]

6 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

The odd time, BT gave up a 1st round pick to get rid of Monahan.  The worst trade in NHL history but other than that, ya it's been 3rds and 4ths to eat cap.

 

 

Both hyperbole and also just incorrect. This stuff really isn't necessary. 

[phoenix66]

The Debrusk rumor is intriguing , we'll see on that.

My top targets would be Monahan and Duclair.

When healthy Monahan can add finish and defense to that top line .Stephenson can fit here as well 

Duclair has shown chemistry with Huberdeau and at the same time help whoever is #3 on that line ( Pelletier?) build that same chemistry .

I think the key somewhere is to get a top line that moves Huberdeau to the 2nd line where he has had the bulk of his career success.. facing fewer top pair D coverage 

 

There are plenty of reliable D available ..Forbort immediately comes to mind 

 

And in the event Markstrom is gone , then Talbot jumps into my target list 

 

[cross16]

If I were the GM I wouldn't be very involved in FA. It's a bad crop, I think the circumstances are going to land to some bad deals and also there really isn't that much of a need for it. 

 

At forward I wouldn't sign anyone. Anyone who can make a difference to this team is going to likely get a horrible deal and the Flames don't really need 2nd line to 4th line forwards. Build the value of what you have and work in a young player or 2. As I said while I can see logic behind Debrusk it's also not really a good move. 

 

On D I hope Kylington is back. If he isn't they might need 2 defenders but they for sure need 1 IMO. I thikn they need a veteran who can give them a bit of a stabilizing piece back there. No one with term though (1 or 2 year deals) so i'm looking at TJ Brodie, Dimitry Kulikov, Ian Cole. 

 

Goalie, while I do expect they will trade Markstrom if you can't also trade Vladar then signing a 3rd goalie is pointless. They'll need someone for the AHL though. 

 

I don't think the Flames will follow this approach but it's just how I would operate. 

[cross16]

10 hours ago, 420since1974 said:

I will be happy if Calgary does not sign any UFAs to long term contracts.

I realize that means that the Flames will get out bid for most of the available UFAs, but I'm fine with that.

I want Calgary to have Cap Space to weaponize it for a couple of seasons.

 

Agreed. Looking at Seravalli's top buyout candidate list is interesting. One is Dubois and I don't think your getting any value from LA to take that deal and I don't want Jack Campbell. 

 

2 names I think are interesting, Barclay Goodrow and Pageau. Both help the Flames in areas of weakness (physicality and at center) so if you could extract a couple of picks those are 2 players I don't mind looking at. 

[travel_dude]

55 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Agreed. Looking at Seravalli's top buyout candidate list is interesting. One is Dubois and I don't think your getting any value from LA to take that deal and I don't want Jack Campbell. 

 

2 names I think are interesting, Barclay Goodrow and Pageau. Both help the Flames in areas of weakness (physicality and at center) so if you could extract a couple of picks those are 2 players I don't mind looking at. 

 

Using Capfriendly's buyout calculator, while I still can, I looked at Goodrow....

There is only one bad year in the buyout length.

The cap hit goes -$247k, $1M, $3.5M,  $1.1M, $1.1M, $1.1M

 

Three years down the road they have a cap hit almost equal to his 3rd year salary cap hit.

And that is likely when the cap is over $90M easily.

Maybe NY wants to clear the books, but do you think it nets us that much?

[cross16]

14 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Using Capfriendly's buyout calculator, while I still can, I looked at Goodrow....

There is only one bad year in the buyout length.

The cap hit goes -$247k, $1M, $3.5M,  $1.1M, $1.1M, $1.1M

 

Three years down the road they have a cap hit almost equal to his 3rd year salary cap hit.

And that is likely when the cap is over $90M easily.

Maybe NY wants to clear the books, but do you think it nets us that much?

 

Nope. You probably only get a mid round pick. Still think its worth it because it's actually a player who could help. 

 

It's a decent buyout for the Rangers but that 3.5 in the 3rd year is what might make the trade attractive. They've got some young players to pay. 

[travel_dude]

1 minute ago, cross16 said:

 

Nope. You probably only get a mid round pick. Still think its worth it because it's actually a player who could help. 

 

It's a decent buyout for the Rangers but that 3.5 in the 3rd year is what might make the trade attractive. They've got some young players to pay. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I think Goodrow is a player underrated by many.  Sorta like Coleman but plays C.

But I have a problem making a trade for an older (not old) player when we still have guys like Mangiapane and Rooney.

Are you thinking he replaces Backlund at 3C or does this allow them to bump up Backlund to 2C and move Sharky to RW?

Just asking because I'm still trying to figure out how best to use Coronato, Pelletier, Pospisil and Zary.

We don't have a true #1C and I'm not sure that Kadri is the answer either.

[cross16]

7 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Don't get me wrong, I think Goodrow is a player underrated by many.  Sorta like Coleman but plays C.

But I have a problem making a trade for an older (not old) player when we still have guys like Mangiapane and Rooney.

Are you thinking he replaces Backlund at 3C or does this allow them to bump up Backlund to 2C and move Sharky to RW?

Just asking because I'm still trying to figure out how best to use Coronato, Pelletier, Pospisil and Zary.

We don't have a true #1C and I'm not sure that Kadri is the answer either.

 

He plays both C and Wing and I would picture him on the 4th line and not more. 

[conundrumed]

Just now, cross16 said:

 

He plays both C and Wing and I would picture him on the 4th line and not more. 

I kinda think it's one of those things where if your purpose is primarily gather assets, fit becomes a bit secondary. Cart-before-the-horse type of thing. With a vet, they'll find a way to fit/provide options. I don't mean fit doesn't matter, but it's secondary.

I like your Pageau idea also. Both players have thrived by hard work.

[The_People1]

If it was up to me, then I would let Kylington go and then extend Oesterle for 2 more years.  Don't underestimate what 5 bad minutes of hockey per game can do over the span of 82 games.  He's probably all we need to negate any other positive moves we make like signing Debrusk.  In fact, if possible, I would sign one more 6/7/8 vet D who thinks he's a 3/4 offensive Dman and play high risk hockey.

 

Having vets around to mentor the kids is important and sometimes you need to show the kids what NOT to do, first hand.

[sak22]

1 minute ago, The_People1 said:

If it was up to me, then I would let Kylington go and then extend Oesterle for 2 more years.  Don't underestimate what 5 bad minutes of hockey per game can do over the span of 82 games.  He's probably all we need to negate any other positive moves we make like signing Debrusk.  In fact, if possible, I would sign one more 6/7/8 vet D who thinks he's a 3/4 offensive Dman and play high risk hockey.

 

Having vets around to mentor the kids is important and sometimes you need to show the kids what NOT to do, first hand.

And destroy the confidence of the best goalie prospect this organization has had in 30 years.  Good plan.

[The_People1]

1 minute ago, sak22 said:

And destroy the confidence of the best goalie prospect this organization has had in 30 years.  Good plan.

 

Vladar will play when Oesterle does.

[phoenix66]

Just now, The_People1 said:

 

Vladar will play when Oesterle does.

Personally I'd trade Vladar..If the return expectations aren't too high I'd say he's highly moveable . Teams like Colorado , Winnipeg, even Toronto will need a low cap hit backup who has shown he can win some games . The next best step in Wolf's development is going to be 20-25 backup games ..a handful against tougher opponents ..but behind a vet who can carry the load . I sound like a broken record but Talbot would be my prototype for that 

[The_People1]

2 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

Personally I'd trade Vladar..If the return expectations aren't too high I'd say he's highly moveable . Teams like Colorado , Winnipeg, even Toronto will need a low cap hit backup who has shown he can win some games . The next best step in Wolf's development is going to be 20-25 backup games ..a handful against tougher opponents ..but behind a vet who can carry the load . I sound like a broken record but Talbot would be my prototype for that 

 

Doubt anyone wants Vladar even if he's on waivers for free.  He was one of the worst goalies in the NHL last season.

 

Not sure if any goalie wants to sign here if they had a choice.  I don't see why Talbot would come back here to Calgary.

 

As of now, we have two goalies signed for next season and it's Vladar and Wolf.  So Vladar is default punching bag vet to play 60-games.  Ease Wolf in with about 20 starts.

[phoenix66]

Just now, The_People1 said:

 

Doubt anyone wants Vladar even if he's on waivers for free.  He was one of the worst goalies in the NHL last season.

 

Not sure if any goalie wants to sign here if they had a choice.  I don't see why Talbot would come back here to Calgary.

 

As of now, we have two goalies signed for next season and it's Vladar and Wolf.  So Vladar is default punching bag vet to play 60-games.  Ease Wolf in with about 20 starts.

Because he wants to start. He'll take a 2-3 year deal as a starter over a backup role.plus he really likes it here. ..nobody else needing a starter is looking at Talbot right now .

Vladar was also hurt most of the season .. worst case you put him on waivers then ..but i think a late draft pick you could find a taker