HFBoards

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

Packaging picks to get rid of dead weight

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-04-2011, 12:43 AM
  #26
showtime8
Registered User
 
showtime8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,134
vCash: 500
And also for unloading contracts, the toughest thing to do is get rid of those picks.

I feel that the Flames desperately needs those picks to restock the cupboard. The best thing they could try and do is to take back a contract that is equally as bad, with less years remaining on the player they're obtaining.


But then again, the team only has 1 year remaining on Langkow, Hagman and Sarich. So if you can ride it out with those contracts, the Flames are in a good situation to sign multiple prospects/free agents. So realistically, Regehr and Stajan would be the only 2 guys that would have the "dead weight" contracts that they should get rid of this year.

showtime8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2011, 12:59 AM
  #27
DBU
Author Mode
 
DBU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,588
vCash: 464
Quote:
Originally Posted by showtime8 View Post
And also for unloading contracts, the toughest thing to do is get rid of those picks.

I feel that the Flames desperately needs those picks to restock the cupboard. The best thing they could try and do is to take back a contract that is equally as bad, with less years remaining on the player they're obtaining.


But then again, the team only has 1 year remaining on Langkow, Hagman and Sarich. So if you can ride it out with those contracts, the Flames are in a good situation to sign multiple prospects/free agents. So realistically, Regehr and Stajan would be the only 2 guys that would have the "dead weight" contracts that they should get rid of this year.
Agreed, except for the Regehr comment. His contract isn't dead weight, and if it is now, it won't be once Sarich is up.

DBU is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2011, 01:48 AM
  #28
Unlimited Chequing
Sweatpants: 9-5-0
 
Unlimited Chequing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Calgary, Alberta, CA
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,503
vCash: 425
It's hilarious that anyone would cite Eric Francis as a credible source (or read The Calgary Sun). He's second only to Eklund. I'm pretty sure TSN's Maggie the Monkey has a better track record than either of those two.

Unlimited Chequing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2011, 04:50 PM
  #29
GoFlames
Registered User
 
GoFlames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,791
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unlimited Chequing View Post
It's hilarious that anyone would cite Eric Francis as a credible source (or read The Calgary Sun). He's second only to Eklund. I'm pretty sure TSN's Maggie the Monkey has a better track record than either of those two.

GoFlames is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2011, 11:19 PM
  #30
Johnny Hoxville
Moderator
Dust Buster
 
Johnny Hoxville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,390
vCash: 2403
Matt Stajan is the only contract that has long term implications to this team. Hagman, Kotalik, Langkow, Sarich, Jokinen all have expiring contracts at the end of next season and alot of them probably will not be back unless we utterly fail in the FA department. If any of them are brought back, it will be at a lower dollar amount except maybe in the case of Jokinen (who may resign for a similar amount). Erixon (probably more likely his agent) is an idiot for using the cap as an excuse to not want to play in Calgary. If the cap goes up again next year, the Flames will have a TON of cap space! Long term the Flames cap situation actually looks really good, however next year will be challenging. So why in hell would you want to give away draft picks to fix a short term problem? A more serious issue for the Flames are our prospects, so trading draft picks is about one of the worst moves you could make.

If we cannot move Stajan next year, I could actually see the Flames keeping him and let one of Langkow or Jokinen go and use Stajan primarily as a 3rd line centre for the remainder of his contract unless we can find a trade that makes sense for us.

Johnny Hoxville is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2011, 10:03 AM
  #31
saillias
Registered User
 
saillias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Calgary
Posts: 2,223
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MVW View Post
Matt Stajan is the only contract that has long term implications to this team. Hagman, Kotalik, Langkow, Sarich, Jokinen all have expiring contracts at the end of next season and alot of them probably will not be back unless we utterly fail in the FA department. If any of them are brought back, it will be at a lower dollar amount except maybe in the case of Jokinen (who may resign for a similar amount). Erixon (probably more likely his agent) is an idiot for using the cap as an excuse to not want to play in Calgary. If the cap goes up again next year, the Flames will have a TON of cap space! Long term the Flames cap situation actually looks really good, however next year will be challenging. So why in hell would you want to give away draft picks to fix a short term problem? A more serious issue for the Flames are our prospects, so trading draft picks is about one of the worst moves you could make.

If we cannot move Stajan next year, I could actually see the Flames keeping him and let one of Langkow or Jokinen go and use Stajan primarily as a 3rd line centre for the remainder of his contract unless we can find a trade that makes sense for us.
You're right, a lot of empty cap space coming up. I think we won't be a cap team the following season (2012-2013). All those contracts will be ending and there's no way we're going to have so many prospects stepping up that they replace the salaries. The organization has to repair its reputation as a winner again before we can start attracting free agents.

saillias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2011, 12:27 PM
  #32
GoFlames
Registered User
 
GoFlames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,791
vCash: 500
Yeah there are tons of UFA contracts after this coming season. That said it could go two ways... one and the m,ost optimistic being players play better in contract years. I need not touch on the other scenario which we see all too often.

GoFlames 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 04:33 AM.

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.