Nigel Dawes on Waivers

Kent Wilson
June 30 2010 10:43AM

Calgary Flames left wing Nigel Dawes (15) receives congratulations after scoring against the Colorado Avalanche during the second period at the Pepsi Center on April 2, 2010 in Denver. Colorado holds a slim two point lead over Calgary for the eighth and final Western Conference playoff slot.  UPI/Gary C. Caskey Photo via Newscom

 

According to a tweet by Kevin Allen of USA today, Nigel Dawes has been placed on waivers by the Calgary Flames. Unlike Kotalik, Dawes has been placed on unconditional waivers according to Bob McKenzie, meaning he is eligible to be bought out.

Aside from the potential longjam at LW should Higgins get re-signed (Hagman, Dawes, Higgins, Glencross), I can't fathom why the Flames would want to rid themselves of Dawes' contract. At 850k, he was a good bet to outperform his cap hit, which is something he most definitely did do last year. He had periods of low productivity (just like everyone else on the team) but spent lots of time taking on tough minutes with Langkow and Bourque and was able to hold his head above water. He finished in the black in terms of possession and scoring chances to end the year and was the most efficient producer of points on the power play - moreso than Jarome Iginla. While not big, he was decent in puck battles, had acceptable vision in the offensive zone and a better than average shot. Only three players managed more than Dawes' 14 goals on the Flames last year and they all appeared in more games.

If Dawes goes away, either due to a claim or a buy-out, the Flames free up some roster space on the left side. What they lose, however, is a young, decent player on a high value contract. This is the kind of guy the Flames should be trying to acquire and keep, not get rid of.

39d8109299a9795cb3b41a4e9b49d501
Former Nations Overlord. Current Fn contributor and curmudgeon For questions, complaints, criticisms, etc contact Kent @ kent.wilson@gmail. Follow him on Twitter here.
Avatar
#1 m f
June 30 2010, 10:52AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

Good lord wtf is wrong with Sutter. I can't believe this garbage.

Avatar
#2 JF
June 30 2010, 11:07AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

Jebus... The team needs more guys like Dawes not less. You'd think a guy making 850K who can score 15 goals would be worth something to someone (Chicago? They need cheap talent).

Avatar
#3 jess
June 30 2010, 11:13AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

you guys are surprised by this? pfft.

besides steve staios is great!

:(

Avatar
#5 Greg
June 30 2010, 02:46PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

Finally some good news. Fedoruk got bought out, so we already know who Sutter will bring in to be this year's goon.

PS. Yes that was sarcastic. The good news part. Not the part about Sutter signing him.

Avatar
#6 R O
June 30 2010, 04:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

This is like the Boyd deal. In isolation, it has a very meh impact but it points to some serious issues in the logic transistor.

Now don't get me wrong, I'd rather our GM not be penny-wise and pound-foolish, but lately I question whether he's not pound-foolish either.

Anyways, it's like the Boyd deal. Makes no sense. None of the rationalizations make any sense.

Logjam at LW? Move the guy to RW.

Save money? Not really, he needs a replacement.

He's injured and ineffective? So? His replacement won't be much better.

Need the roster spot? Yeah, right. Just don't sign the perennial goon, problem solved.

Need the contract? I don't know, RCleave pointed out it was 42 this morning, and plus can't we just not qualify one of our terrible RFAs (we are replete in those) and then sign an AHL only player to, you know, only play in the AHL? That's what most of our RFAs will end up doing anyway.

Avatar
#7 Casey
June 30 2010, 10:56AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

This is a likely a setup move for something else.

I can't believe that Sutter just gives Dawes away for free without offering him around the league first. Doesn't make sense to give away a "valuable" asset without at least trying to squeeze out a late round draft pick.

Perhaps we are over valuing Dawes a bit?

Avatar
#8 Scott
June 30 2010, 10:57AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

This move would be far worse then the deal Sutter made to bring in Kotalik!

As a sutter fan, I would be completely shocked and dismayed if indeed Dawes was bought out. His cap friendly salary would be better off suited for a trade then a buy out, I can't understand this move.

Perhaps we have to wait and see what the fallout is, but watching Dawes in a different uniform next year would be to much to handle! (Especially when he scores 25 goals!)

Avatar
#10 Sincity1976
June 30 2010, 11:26AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

They have too many top 9 wingers today (Iggy, Hagman, Bourque, Glencross, *Higgins, Moss, Dawes, Kotalik). One has to assume with the recent moves they are looking to bring on a winger via UFA so add one more to the list. Thats 9 players for 6 spots. Scratch one as the 13 forward and you need to get rid of two.

Of the list Kotalik, Dawes, and Moss are the clearest candidates for getting moved. Kotalik is already being dealt with. That leaves Dawes and Moss. Since neither fit on the fourth line if you can't trade them (and I assume Sutter has tried) then what do you do?

Seriously. Sutter passes wind in the bathroom and people think its a bad move. We want more players like Dawes? The one dimensional streaky scorer types? Where the heck do you put them?

Avatar
#11 Domebeers.com
June 30 2010, 11:27AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

And you guys wonder why we go with the Darryl Sutter is dumb meme in our jokes.

This is insane, unless he upgrades the position, then it isn't. Can you beat 15 goals at 850k? Doubt it, but it will be fun to watch Darryl try.

Also, if he dropped him to bring in Ilya! Ilya! Ilya! we will love Darryl forever.

Avatar
#12 Balthazar
June 30 2010, 11:27AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Huh. A few options:

a) He's using this as a method to show willingness to trade Dawes to other GM's. Seems ham handed and doesn't make sense.

b) He's trying to send a message to someone (everyone) about his willingness to make changes to make the team better, but again it's ham handed and I'm confused by his target. This is like putting the junior trader on notice at Goldman Sachs and letting the senior partners draw bonuses.

c) He actually needs to make room for something and is looking for every nickel and dime, except those that could be extracted from ... say... Steve Staios.

d) Nigel wants out and with no one to take him in trade (sounds unlikely) Sutter is exploring options

e) Sutter is a reader of the Flames Nation and is just having a laugh at our expense as the Nation wigs out. "Dance puppets! Dance! Mmwahahahaha! Let's see what they do when I say I'm going to resign Joker! Mmwwahahaha!"

Nigel isn't the second coming of Mike Bossey and isn't likely a lifer in Calgary but sure does seem to fit the 3rd (maybe 2nd) line LW need at a fabulous price...

Oh, and option f) Not true. Not that I doubt the Tweeterverse. But maybe this isn't correct. Do we have confirmation?

Avatar
#13 walkinvisible
June 30 2010, 11:36AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

to me, this is proof positive that darryl sutter has lost his melon. 850K for a guy that can play rather effectively on the second line ? one of the patetented d.sutter reclamation projects that actually SUCCEEDED ? logjam or not, isn't hagman more of a cointoss at this point due to cap hit and overall potential effectiveness ???

i hate this effin' team now. i can only hope i'm not feeling that way in october.

Avatar
#15 Scott
June 30 2010, 11:40AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@walkinvisible

"i hate this effin' team now. i can only hope i'm not feeling that way in october."

I hear ya, I have always been a fan of D.Sutter's proficiency at making deals happen, good or bad, they keep the fans interested.

But with the state of the team right now, I've got knots in my stomach thinking about this team come october. I hope something good happens to this team, and I don't think it comes in the form of Jason Spezza.

Avatar
#16 JF
June 30 2010, 11:53AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Sincity1976

No, the low cap hit, quality minute, decent production types. In other words value for money.

Avatar
#17 Graham
June 30 2010, 12:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

This is a strange one, all I can think off is Sutters comments about not overpaying for 4th line type players. He must have a cheaper option?

Avatar
#18 Graham
June 30 2010, 12:20PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

The Herald is reporting that Chris Higgins is going to test the open market, although, his agent sid that this did not rule out signing with the Flames.

Makes the Dawes moves even stranger, why wouldn't you wait a bit before putting him on waivers?

Avatar
#19 jonesin
June 30 2010, 12:27PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Does anyone see Tanguay coming back to Calgary?

Avatar
#20 Balthazar
June 30 2010, 12:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Kent Wilson wrote:

McKenzie confirmed, so it's true.

The only reason I can see is Sutter wants the roster spot open for someone else. Defensible, perhaps. I just wish it didn't come at the expense of the Flames best forward bargain.

Huh. It's true... well, let's see. Sutter has a plan, I trust. I have no idea what it is, but it should be interesting to see the results, if any.

I'm stepping back from the Panic! button, but keeping close to the WTF? button.

Avatar
#21 Dano0049
June 30 2010, 01:06PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I hope Sutter isn't as confused as we all are or this team is really screwed!

Avatar
#22 Nolan
June 30 2010, 01:17PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Wha? Not a big fan of Dawes but $850,000 for 10-15 goals with potential for more? Cheap guy not a guy who will hurt you. WHY? You'd rather have Kotalik who doesnt seem to care half the time, is a minus player, 10 goals for $3M than a guy who appears to give his all and can play in most instances for about 25% of the salary?

Avatar
#23 Wittmeier
June 30 2010, 01:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I, too, join the chorus and say "wtf?"

Sutter's next step is anybody's guess. Sign Moreau? Get Phaneuf back? Rob a bank?

Really, I have no clue anymore.

Avatar
#24 Sincity1976
June 30 2010, 01:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Barring Moss (who we can't move) or Kotalik (who we are dealing with) which winger would you prefer to be moved? I can't think of one.

Avatar
#25 Greg
June 30 2010, 01:57PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Stunned. Confused. Angry. Speechless.

The next 2 days Sutter will either prove to be a genius or officially change me into a Sutter-must-go choir boy. At the moment, the odds are heavily in that favor.

Avatar
#27 Scott
June 30 2010, 02:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Kent Wilson

Isn't that so true, Calgary does have the great amount of 2nd and 3rd tier talent in the league. Too bad we never seem to have that guy who outperforms expectations and has a breakout year.

Our problem is we pay them like 1st tier, or trade away or 1st tier players to bring them in.

1.5 mil for Nystrom, for a 3rd/4th liner is completely acceptable, Not for all three 4th liners, but for a PK guy, and excellent 5 on 5 guy, its worth it.

Avatar
#29 Luc
June 30 2010, 02:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

could this move signify sutter maybe bring in ANOTHER left winger?? tanguay?? just cuz we do have a lot and dawes might just be odd man out?

Avatar
#30 Vanderneuf
June 30 2010, 02:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

You better have a plan Daz... I live in Vancouver and my blind defense of you is wearing thin.

Avatar
#31 Scott
June 30 2010, 02:40PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Kent Wilson

I see what your saying, I didn't think his offensive zone work was all that bad, but when you were comparing it to the rest of the team last year.. Things get a little skewed.

So if Nystom goes to NYI, does that mean they sign him to a 20 year contract, in which case he blows out his knee and every year comes up with new and intriguing ways to keep himself out of the line up? (Dipietro)

If we do lose Nystrom though, who will be on our 4th line, seems like we would have the most talented 4th line in the league, for what that is worth. Unless we bring up Chris Chucko to be a career 4th liner, we don't have 4th liners on this team. All third liners!

Avatar
#34 Scott
June 30 2010, 03:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Kent Wilson

Thats what concerns me, the idea of "replacement players" being stuck in a 4th line role. Mcgratten, Mayers,these are not replacement players, and if we have to find or bring up 3 guys to fill those spots, I hope its not going to destroy growth ala Moss and Boyd. If we bring up some guys from abbotsford, I hope its not a case of a backlund, Niemsz, or one of the other guys down there that can actually score. Is this an actually concern or am I being paranoid.

I just think that the way the flames have used their 4th liners, they are there for good, so I would hate to see another draft pick come up and spend a few seasons on the 4th line, only to be traded away for not meeting expectations. (Boyd)

Avatar
#35 Scott
June 30 2010, 03:50PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Kent Wilson wrote:

According to Vicki Hall, Sutter does indeed intend to buy Dawes out if he clears waivers. His buyout would cost just 141,667 against the cap over the next two seasons.

This has to be a case of clearing a roster spot. Sutter has his eye on another LWer.

If the rumor about Tanguay is correct, what would be the price you'd be willing to pay for a Tanguay, who, while playing on a team with star studded forwards, seemed to underachieve, is he worth 1.5 mil? He had less goals than Dawes, and only 5 more points, does that mean he is worth less than a mil?

Avatar
#36 rubbertrout
June 30 2010, 04:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

~Sutter will need the Dawes buyout cap hit to ensure he can ice a full team late in the year amiright?~

Avatar
#37 Graham
June 30 2010, 04:36PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Kent Wilson wrote:

According to Vicki Hall, Sutter does indeed intend to buy Dawes out if he clears waivers. His buyout would cost just 141,667 against the cap over the next two seasons.

This has to be a case of clearing a roster spot. Sutter has his eye on another LWer.

Maybe part of the so called master plan is falling into place.... Make all of the hockey decisions PRIOR to having an Asst GM or two forced upon you.

Avatar
#40 SmellOfVictory
June 30 2010, 07:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Scott wrote:

If the rumor about Tanguay is correct, what would be the price you'd be willing to pay for a Tanguay, who, while playing on a team with star studded forwards, seemed to underachieve, is he worth 1.5 mil? He had less goals than Dawes, and only 5 more points, does that mean he is worth less than a mil?

Tanguay did not spend most of his time with the best players on the Lightning; not the worst, either, but not Stamkos or St Louis. In addition, he's a better overall player than Dawes, and he has a record of being significantly better point-wise. If it's his injury that was holding him back, he could be due for improvement.

So yes, I'd say he's worth 1.5 million.

Avatar
#41 44stampede
June 30 2010, 08:47PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

With so few guys that can actually put the puck in the net why oh why...?

Not much to add to everything that has been said.

Good contract for a guy that is a pretty good third liner, can hold his own at times on the second and had 4 PP goals.

With Nystrom leaving I don't see a problem on the left. If they are adding another L wing AND keeping Higgins then move over to the right.

Whatever...

Comments are closed for this article.