HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Flames trades part 2

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-02-2010, 12:17 PM
  #101
LickTheEnvelope
6th Overall Blows
 
LickTheEnvelope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 28,379
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Dufresne View Post
I don't have anything good to say about Kotalik's intangibles BUT 7 goals in 19 games (29G pace) pretty much negates terms like "brutal".

19 games too small a sample size? He's been a 20G scorer his entire career (per 82gms):
http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/p...93&encode=TRUE

I'm guessing that's what Sutter's thinking: a 2cnd line winger, 2cnd pp unit, who's guaranteed to score 20+ goals. I hear terms like "albatross contract" thrown around- for a 3M/3 yrs- 20 goals scorer? If his intangibles are so bad....how come Hagman's positive intangibles aren't counted for his "albatross contract" 3M for 3 years? Pretty much market value imo.

The Flames forward group is vastly improved. Too few of them are playmakers, or natural centers (Higgins has played C before). Sutter's not done I think.
Yes Kotalik did well for a couple weeks playing with Ales Hemsky almost every shift.

Sadly there is no playmaker on Calgary to feed Kotalik pucks like Hemsky did.

LickTheEnvelope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 12:26 PM
  #102
hlrsr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,425
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eukaryote View Post
I agree with you. Regardless with how it works out, Sutter mismanaged his assets. If Burke was willing to give up what will be a lottery pick (probably 1st or 2nd overall), a low 2nd round pick and what will more than likely be a top 10 pick next year for Kessel, he would've done the same for Dion. And I suspect other teams would've as well.
I was just going to say this. Boston managed to turn Kessel, coming off a 60pt season and looking to command a $5M+ salary, into two 1st round picks and a 2nd round pick. From a bad team to boot!

But Phaneuf, another young player with an expensive contract, only brings back mediocre players with expiring contracts? Weird.

hlrsr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 12:52 PM
  #103
Andy Dufresne
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Kazakhstan
Posts: 1,600
vCash: 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by LickTheEnvelope View Post
Yes Kotalik did well for a couple weeks playing with Ales Hemsky almost every shift.

Sadly there is no playmaker on Calgary to feed Kotalik pucks like Hemsky did.
Couple weeks my ass! Way to miss the entire point though. Kotalik for 6 seasons. SIX! Every year scored 20G+ with the Sabres. Which 1 is the anomaly. This year with the NYR or EVERY other year of his career. Didn't know Hemsky ever played for Buffalo.

note: the only seasons he didn't score 20 goals he missed roughly 20 gms to injury. Do the math and you'll see those were 20G/82gm seasons as well. Pretty damn consistent until he met "Torturella".

Andy Dufresne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 12:58 PM
  #104
VanEric
Registered User
 
VanEric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,344
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Dufresne View Post
Couple weeks my ass! Way to miss the entire point though. Kotalik for 6 seasons. SIX! Every year scored 20G+ with the Sabres. Which 1 is the anomaly. This year with the NYR or EVERY other year of his career. Didn't know Hemsky ever played for Buffalo.

note: the only seasons he didn't score 20 goals he missed roughly 20 gms to injury. Do the math and you'll see those were 20G/82gm seasons as well. Pretty damn consistent until he met "Torturella".
Wait until he meets Brent Sutter!

VanEric is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 01:09 PM
  #105
Tiranis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 22,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Dufresne View Post
Couple weeks my ass! Way to miss the entire point though. Kotalik for 6 seasons. SIX! Every year scored 20G+ with the Sabres. Which 1 is the anomaly. This year with the NYR or EVERY other year of his career. Didn't know Hemsky ever played for Buffalo.

note: the only seasons he didn't score 20 goals he missed roughly 20 gms to injury. Do the math and you'll see those were 20G/82gm seasons as well. Pretty damn consistent until he met "Torturella".
He was also consistently a minus player... he's an average to below-average 2nd line player. People complained about the Samuelsson signing and Kotalik is quite a bit worse actually.

Tiranis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 01:10 PM
  #106
Bring Back Krajicek*
 
Bring Back Krajicek*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,820
vCash: 500
Kotalik brings a great defensive and checking presence to the Flames. I believe this wholeheartedly and am in no way being sarcastic or facetious.

Bring Back Krajicek* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 01:12 PM
  #107
Uhmkay
Weber2Canucks2013
 
Uhmkay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,805
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hlrsr View Post
I was just going to say this. Boston managed to turn Kessel, coming off a 60pt season and looking to command a $5M+ salary, into two 1st round picks and a 2nd round pick. From a bad team to boot!

But Phaneuf, another young player with an expensive contract, only brings back mediocre players with expiring contracts? Weird.
Kessel was/is playing at a level that warrents a 5M+ contract. Phaneuf wasn't playing up to his 7M+ contract, and this lowers the value of the player in a trade. You have to maximize your return on what you spend in cap space. If you're trading for a player that isn't living up to his contract you're going to be either trading away other players that aren't living up to their contracts either, or other players that don't have as much upside currently as that one player. Both situations happened with the Flames trades.

They couldn't get another guy with as much upside for Phaneuf, they got a bunch of mid-tear players, worth about the same in cap space. For Jokinen, they got another guy in Kotalik who isn't worth his 3M cap hit either.

Uhmkay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 01:12 PM
  #108
Eukaryote
Registered User
 
Eukaryote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Dufresne View Post
The Flames forward group is vastly improved. Too few of them are playmakers, or natural centers (Higgins has played C before). Sutter's not done I think.
Vastly improved? If so, then why would you think Sutter's not done?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Dufresne View Post
Couple weeks my ass! Way to miss the entire point though. Kotalik for 6 seasons. SIX! Every year scored 20G+ with the Sabres. ....

note: the only seasons he didn't score 20 goals he missed roughly 20 gms to injury. Do the math and you'll see those were 20G/82gm seasons as well. Pretty damn consistent until he met "Torturella".
Yes, he did that in the Leastern conference. Those numbers are inflated. How have Jokinen and JBo, to name just two, fared since coming West? If you think any of the former Leafs or Rangers will match their numbers in the West, then you haven't been paying attention to the obvious differences between the two conferences.

Eukaryote is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 01:23 PM
  #109
Eukaryote
Registered User
 
Eukaryote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uhmkay View Post
Kessel was/is playing at a level that warrents a 5M+ contract. Phaneuf wasn't playing up to his 7M+ contract, and this lowers the value of the player in a trade. ...
You also have to value potential impact. At only 24, Phaneuf still has that where none of the players coming in return have anything close to his potential. The fact is, did Sutter get maximum value for his asset? I would say no, not even close. He has traded the future for the short term. A short term that is anything but certain especially consider only Hagman and White are assets they control beyond July 1st.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uhmkay View Post
They couldn't get another guy with as much upside for Phaneuf, they got a bunch of mid-tear players, worth about the same in cap space.
Exactly, mid-tier guys you can always find. Star d-men can be game breakers; the kind of players necessary to become an elite team. They've now lost that potential. It was a short-sighted move based on panic and desperation.

Eukaryote is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 01:28 PM
  #110
hlrsr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,425
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uhmkay View Post
Kessel was/is playing at a level that warrents a 5M+ contract. Phaneuf wasn't playing up to his 7M+ contract, and this lowers the value of the player in a trade. You have to maximize your return on what you spend in cap space. If you're trading for a player that isn't living up to his contract you're going to be either trading away other players that aren't living up to their contracts either, or other players that don't have as much upside currently as that one player. Both situations happened with the Flames trades.

They couldn't get another guy with as much upside for Phaneuf, they got a bunch of mid-tear players, worth about the same in cap space. For Jokinen, they got another guy in Kotalik who isn't worth his 3M cap hit either.
I get that Kessel had more value just because it wasn't "officially proven" yet that he wasn't living up to his contract, but I still think a guy with upside like Phaneuf, even with a bad contract (only if he keeps playing poorly), should garner something that has an upside in the future.

You kind of make my point with Jokinen. They exchange Jokinen's cap hit for another underachiever in Kotalik, and this is kind of the same thing that happened with Phaneuf. Thing is, Phaneuf has way more upside than Jokinen does, so shouldn't the return have been a bit better in terms of the future at least?

edit: I guess there's Ian White...

hlrsr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 01:38 PM
  #111
Uhmkay
Weber2Canucks2013
 
Uhmkay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,805
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eukaryote View Post
You also have to value potential impact. At only 24, Phaneuf still has that where none of the players coming in return have anything close to his potential. The fact is, did Sutter get maximum value for his asset? I would say no, not even close. He has traded the future for the short term. A short term that is anything but certain especially consider only Hagman and White are assets they control beyond July 1st.



Exactly, mid-tier guys you can always find. Star d-men can be game breakers; the kind of players necessary to become an elite team. They've now lost that potential. It was a short-sighted move based on panic and desperation.

Oh I whole heartedly agree that they lost this deal. They *MIGHT*, and I stress MIGHT because I don't think they did, have become better in the short term, but they lost a valuable asset for basically nothing more than a bunch of guys that are readily available every offseason.

I think the flames would have been better to trade Phaneuf to a team for a top 6 forward that is still on a lower cap hit contract, and a 1st round draft pick. If I were to use the canucks as an example, I'm thinking something along the lines of Raymond, 1st round pick and maybe a prospect like Grabner.

Now I know that there are going to be people who think Raymond, Grabner and a 1st is too much, but I think there would have been a team out there that would have offered a similar package possibly closer to the deadline. The only problem though is you'd need to find a team that not only is willing to give up those players, but also has the cap space to fit Phaneuf into their team. I think that Sutter really messed up what he could have gotten for Phaneuf.

The Jokinen trade is just wrong on so many levels for the Flames. Jokinen was coming off the books at the end of this year, so they could have used that money to sign a UFA or two to fill their needs, or they could have traded him at the deadline.

It's obvious, as has been stated repeatedly in every thread regarding these trades, Sutter is now in "Save my job mode" and he's not looking out for whats going to help the Flames past this season. If he survives this season, he'll continue in his "Save my job mode" next year when he continues to try to fix this mess.

Uhmkay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 01:48 PM
  #112
Fictional Realism
Moustache Power
 
Fictional Realism's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Crease
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,488
vCash: 894
It seems to me the Flames are getting quite a bit easier to play against; especially for a team like the Canucks with a bunch of higher-end forward talent. Botch's article in the paper mentioned it, but you have to imagine the Sedins are pretty stoked not to have to play against Phaneuf anymore, and well Jokinen wasn't exactly Mr.Physical he was still a bigger centre. Stajan is as soft as Wellwood judging by last nights game; I didn't even notice Hagman and Mayers is just another plug (and a downgrade on Prust in my opinion).

Fictional Realism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 01:49 PM
  #113
Uhmkay
Weber2Canucks2013
 
Uhmkay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,805
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hlrsr View Post
I get that Kessel had more value just because it wasn't "officially proven" yet that he wasn't living up to his contract, but I still think a guy with upside like Phaneuf, even with a bad contract (only if he keeps playing poorly), should garner something that has an upside in the future.

You kind of make my point with Jokinen. They exchange Jokinen's cap hit for another underachiever in Kotalik, and this is kind of the same thing that happened with Phaneuf. Thing is, Phaneuf has way more upside than Jokinen does, so shouldn't the return have been a bit better in terms of the future at least?

edit: I guess there's Ian White...
And thats exactly why many of us think that they were fleeced on the Phaneuf Deal. A general manager trying to save his job mortgaged his teams future, sold low instead of selling high, and very quickly turned this team into one that still has some future/players to build around to one that is in shambles.

If I could use an example, this trade reminds me of the trades I try to make in my hockey pools. I pick up a few guys on wavers, package them up, and try to dump them all off on someone for one of their GOOD players..... I usually get laughed at.

Uhmkay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 01:50 PM
  #114
LostMyGlasses*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Simon Fraser
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,430
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LickTheEnvelope View Post
Yes Kotalik did well for a couple weeks playing with Ales Hemsky almost every shift.

Sadly there is no playmaker on Calgary to feed Kotalik pucks like Hemsky did.
The best part is that Tortorella has benched Kotalik multiple times because of his piss poor defensive play.

What will Sutter do when Kotalik is -9 in his first week as a Flame?

LostMyGlasses* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 01:50 PM
  #115
Juicey
aka HamhuisHip
 
Juicey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,107
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Dufresne View Post
The Flames forward group is vastly improved. Too few of them are playmakers, or natural centers (Higgins has played C before). Sutter's not done I think.
I too think their forward group is improved, with greater depth on the wings. I still see the centre position as a glaring weakness. They still have no decent playmaker in the pivot position to feed Iginla.

I think Brad Richards is a target for Sutter now. He is a good fit for that team. The big question is what would it take for Dallas to move Richards and does Calgary possess the right assets.

I think it would take Backlund plus a couple of expiring contracts to do it.

EDIT: I think Dallas is looking to shed salary with the owners recent financial trouble.

Juicey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 01:56 PM
  #116
LostMyGlasses*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Simon Fraser
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,430
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GroundskeeperWillie View Post
I too think their forward group is improved, with greater depth on the wings. I still see the centre position as a glaring weakness. They still have no decent playmaker in the pivot position to feed Iginla.

I think Brad Richards is a target for Sutter now. He is a good fit for that team. The big question is what would it take for Dallas to move Richards and does Calgary possess the right assets.

I think it would take Backlund plus a couple of expiring contracts to do it.

EDIT: I think Dallas is looking to shed salary with the owners recent financial trouble.
I've heard this as well. Dallas may also be looking to move Turco, so they may need goaltending help.

Perhaps something around
To Dallas
L. Irving
M. Backlund
C. Sarich

To Calgary
M. Richards

LostMyGlasses* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 01:58 PM
  #117
Tiranis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 22,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GroundskeeperWillie View Post
I too think their forward group is improved, with greater depth on the wings. I still see the centre position as a glaring weakness. They still have no decent playmaker in the pivot position to feed Iginla.

I think Brad Richards is a target for Sutter now. He is a good fit for that team. The big question is what would it take for Dallas to move Richards and does Calgary possess the right assets.

I think it would take Backlund plus a couple of expiring contracts to do it.

EDIT: I think Dallas is looking to shed salary with the owners recent financial trouble.
Dallas is right behind the Flames and is competing for a playoff spot... seems like bad management to trade with them now.

Tiranis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 02:03 PM
  #118
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,920
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
Dallas is right behind the Flames and is competing for a playoff spot... seems like bad management to trade with them now.
exactly. why would a team that is competing for a playoff spot move a key asset to help a team they are competing for that spot with?

If Dallas ownership is losing money, wouldn't they rather not help a team that could keep them out of the playoffs, which could lead to millions in playoff revenue?

And if they're going to drop Turco's $6mill salary, then why move the team's best player as well to cut salary?

my guess would be that if they are cutting salary due to losing money, it'll be done in the offseason, not when they're so close to making the playoffs and the increased revenue that comes from it.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 02:05 PM
  #119
opendoor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,460
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
Dallas is right behind the Flames and is competing for a playoff spot... seems like bad management to trade with them now.
No kidding. The revenue from a playoff series would go a lot farther in helping their economic woes than dumping their best player for Calgary's table scraps.

opendoor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 02:10 PM
  #120
Reign Nateo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,744
vCash: 500
Just awful moves from the surface. When the Phanuef deal went down I thought, "well I expected them to get a front end asset at least for him, but they'll have a bunch of cap room in the off-season." Then the second trade pretty much took that away.

Even if they re-sign Stajan these deals just reek of desperation. The core they do have is aging and the forwards they brought in just don't seem to be good fits for the Western Conference.

Higgins I can see. He's scored 20+ 3 or 4 times and can at least check, but Kotalik? With that contract it's just inexcusable.

Reign Nateo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 02:17 PM
  #121
Juicey
aka HamhuisHip
 
Juicey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,107
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
Dallas is right behind the Flames and is competing for a playoff spot... seems like bad management to trade with them now.
I agree it would be bad management, but it wouldn't be the first time a bad trade is made for financial reasons. Again, this is a trade Dallas would make only if directed by ownership.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO View Post
exactly. why would a team that is competing for a playoff spot move a key asset to help a team they are competing for that spot with?

If Dallas ownership is losing money, wouldn't they rather not help a team that could keep them out of the playoffs, which could lead to millions in playoff revenue?

And if they're going to drop Turco's $6mill salary, then why move the team's best player as well to cut salary?

my guess would be that if they are cutting salary due to losing money, it'll be done in the offseason, not when they're so close to making the playoffs and the increased revenue that comes from it.
I think Dallas will have a hard time moving Turco so his salary will remain for the season. Again as I said above this would only make sense if Dallas ownership directed management to shed salary before the end of the season.

Also, I am not sure what assets Calgary would have to give up to intice Dallas to move Richards.

Maybe Backlund, Boyd, and Hagman. I think both Boyd and Backlund are on 2-way contracts and can be sent down to the minors. In any case it will be something significant from Calgary. In any case this is speculation on my part.

Juicey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 02:18 PM
  #122
Uhmkay
Weber2Canucks2013
 
Uhmkay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,805
vCash: 500
I can't wait to play against Calgary now. They're a wimpier team than before, and Kotalik is notorious for being one of the worst 5 on 5 forwards in the game today. He doesn't hustle to get back on defense and he is notorious for giving up the puck, both at even strength, and in particular on the powerplay.

Sather takes advantage of another desperate GM.

Uhmkay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 02:36 PM
  #123
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,908
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eukaryote View Post
I agree with you. Regardless with how it works out, Sutter mismanaged his assets. If Burke was willing to give up what will be a lottery pick (probably 1st or 2nd overall), a low 2nd round pick and what will more than likely be a top 10 pick next year for Kessel, he would've done the same for Dion. And I suspect other teams would've as well.

Sutter's trades the last few days were motivated by panic and desperation. That's always a bad recipe for sound management.
Here is what Burke said publicly after the trade with Calgary:

“Darryl Sutter displayed more innovation and creativity than I did. He did a real good job in getting this deal done.”

Here is the translation:

I could not believe that Sutter was dumb enough to give up Phaneuf for so little. But then he is a rube and I have a law degree from Harvard.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 02:49 PM
  #124
Uhmkay
Weber2Canucks2013
 
Uhmkay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,805
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetcoaster View Post
Here is what Burke said publicly after the trade with Calgary:

“Darryl Sutter displayed more innovation and creativity than I did. He did a real good job in getting this deal done.”

Here is the translation:

I could not believe that Sutter was dumb enough to give up Phaneuf for so little. But then he is a rube and I have a law degree from Harvard.
Thankfully we have Wetcoaster to translate Lawyer talk for us.

and LOL @ Rube

Uhmkay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 03:10 PM
  #125
Eukaryote
Registered User
 
Eukaryote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetcoaster View Post
...
Here is the translation:

I could not believe that Sutter was dumb enough to give up Phaneuf for so little. But then he is a rube and I have a law degree from Harvard.
LOL. I saw a post elsewhere wondering what Burke could of got if he also offered Sutter some copper metal and shiny beads. What happened is a classic example of the city slicker conning the country bumpkin.

Eukaryote is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:38 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.