Cammalleri Trade Implications

Kent Wilson
January 13 2012 10:37AM

Last night Jay Feaster made his first major move of the new season, dealing another former Sutter cornerstone in Rene Bourque for disgruntled Hab Mike Cammalleri. Of course, Flames fans remember the latter from the 2008-09 season when he became the first Flames skater in a decade to score more goals than Jarome Iginla (39).

That was the high water for both the player and the team ever since. The Flames haven't made the playoffs in the two intervening years and Cammalleri's production and stock have fallen back down to earth. The hope, I suppose, is to see if Michael can rediscover the magic here and reinvigorate the Flames post-season chances in the process.

The Good

I'd be lying if I said I wasn't excited to see Cammalleri back on the team. I was thrilled when the Darryl acquired him the first time around and have always liked him as a player. He is crafty with the puck and has a very quick release. Cammalleri is an asset in the offensive zone and will likely make the Flames PP (which is still fairly abysmal) better.

Ridding the Flames of Bourque is also a boon both on and off the ice. Bourque arrived in town as a third-line, PK player who couldn't score much but could be counted on to take relatively difficult assignments and survive. And despite being one of the Flames strongest overall forwards for the period of about two seasons, he eventually devolved into a third-line, PP player who can score but couldn't be trusted against any quality competition whatsoever.

Make no mistake, Bourque was a liability and his contract was an albatross as a result. His goal and point totals have been decent since he stepped into the elevator shaft, but he has put up some of the worst possession and scoring chance ratios on the team. Whatever points he was accruing, he was costing the team in spades otherwise. In addition, his unfortunate penchant for taking way more penalties than he draws never went away. This year, for instance, only Corey Sarich has a worse penalty differential than Rene on the Flames.

Cammalleri isn't a possession king himself, but he's faced some of the toughest ice for the Canadiens this year and isn't completely under water. He's better at moving the puck north, better at distributing and draws way more minors than he takes. He's also marginally younger than Bourque and his contract terminates two years earlier. The Flames got the better player in the deal.

The acquisition also means Calgary will be able to put together more than one offensively oriented line, particularly when (if?) Alex Tanguay returns. In fact, Sutter may be able to revert the Glencross/Jokinen duo back to a shut-down line and then run a couple of relatively sheltered scoring units including Backlund, Tanguay, Iginla and Cammalleri.

The Bad

When the trade was announced to the Saddledome faithful last night during the game, a big cheer rose up from the crowd. That's because, as mentioned, Flames fans remember Cammalleri as a 39-goal, 82-point player and it's those good vibes anchoring their perception of him now.

Unfortunately, Cammalleri's true talent level isn't of the 35+ goals, 80+ point variety. He has broken both plateaus only twice in in his career. His 39-goal performance in Calgary was predicated on a confluence of factors that are unlikely to repeat: cherry circumstances, lots of PP time and a career high shooting percentage of 15.3%. One of the reasons he has been unable to replicate his goal totals in Montreal is his SH% regressed back to normal levels (career average = 11.4%). Keep in mind he has just nine goals and 22-points in 38 games this year (47-point pace) which is why he was available in the first place.

Unfortunately, $6 million/year ($7 million in real dollars over the next two seasons) is a lot of scratch to pay for a 25-goal, 60-point guy (at best) who doesn't necessarily excel against other big guns. While I noted earlier that Cammalleri has been better in terms of ES play than Bourque recently the truth is he's never been a true heavy hitter at five-on-five. This year in Montreal, for instance, his corsi rate is a mediocre -2.87/60 (-0.4 relative).

For that reason reason this trade isn't one that will push the Flames over the top. It makes the team better, but not in any earth moving, fundamental sense. The Flames primary weakness was and remains a lack of truly elite ES forwards - guys in the Kesler, Bergeron, Dastyuk mold who play in tough circumstances every night and excel. Relative to those forwards, Cammalleri is a support player - a better one than Bourque most likely - but he's not a cornerstone figure around which the organization can re-orient themselves and begin challenging the best in business. The Flames range of ability hasn't shifted from 7-10 in the Western Conference. All Cammalleri does is move the team a little closer to that particular ceiling and little further away from the floor.

The Cynical

There are other reasons to view this move with a jaundiced eye. The acquisition of an expensive, 30-year old former Flame is an echo of the prior (failed) Darryl Sutter regime. The Flames surrendered two futures in the deal (a second round pick and Patrick Holland) and while neither of them is a good bet to be impactful in the future, the decision suggests the focus of the club hasn't notably shifted despite the changing of the guard. For those urgently seeking a sign that the organization has finally fixed their gaze on the future, this recent move is anathema. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

In my Follow the Money article I noted the Flames would be disinclined to pursue a true shift in direction owing to noteworthy revenue/gate receipts. While the club hasn't enjoyed any real success on the ice in recent memory, the market has consistently reinforced the Flames brass and ownership's management nonetheless. Winning is the surest way to market a team and leverage your stars for profit, but it apparently isn't the only way.

The cheers I heard while attending the Ducks game were, I think, as much the goal of this addition as anything else. With the Flames sinking to 12th in the conference, suffering through multiple injuries and playing a brand of hockey that can only be described as "soul sucking" (six shots through two periods last night folks), a sizable portion of Cammalleri's not insignificant ticket may be written off as "marketing expense".

The buzz around Darryl's return on Satruday has increased from a low hum to a anticipatory rumble thanks to the Cammalleri deal. Just last week I heard rumors they were swaths of lower bowl seats empty during recent 'Dome games. I can guarantee there won't be a single empty ducket for the game come tomorrow night, however.

The Cammalleri addition was ostensibly made to renew the Flames playoff drive, but it will also enliven the fans obviously flagging interest as well. It may not accomplish the former, but the latter is all but assured.    

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 icedawg_42
January 13 2012, 10:47AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

That last paragraph is very well put - it worked for me, I'll admit it. Feaster corrected a grievous error of Darryls for letting Cammi walk, albeit at a bit of a scary price. Im glad to see Bork gone, he was moulding himself into a very uncharismatic player.

Avatar
#2 OilFan
January 13 2012, 10:59AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

At first I thought the flames win the trade but looking at the numbers I'd say Montreal wins hands down.

Avatar
#3 icedawg_42
January 13 2012, 11:01AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

As far as the salary/cap hit...RossCreekNation put it very well on twitter: Daymond Langkow & Rene Bourque's cap hits = Mike Cammalleri & Lee Stempniak's cap hits. IMO the current value for that money is better spent!!!

Avatar
#4 theartfuldodger
January 13 2012, 11:02AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I didnt realize the second round pick was included.... Nice to see him back and worth it if the numbers come back too..and if he stays healthy?

Avatar
#5 maimster
January 13 2012, 11:05AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I'm a bit more inclined to hold on to the "good" than the "bad" in your analysis, but also believe the "cynical" is right on. I'm not worried about the change in direction - everyone has a different definition of what that means anyway, and trading away a marginal prospect when you're getting rid of a bad contract/player for a better player isn't that big a deal. My biggest fear is that the Flames management makes all moves with an eye to keeping the public happy, and while that's understandable to a degree, making tough decisions is one of the hallmarks of good leaders.

One question, Kent: you noted players in the "Bergeron, Kesler, Datsyuk" mold and while I agree the Flames don't have one of those guys, I'm not sure many teams do (mainly because those always seem to be the three guys listed when referencing this particular class of players). I'm curious, off the top of your head, other guys that fit this description. I can think of a few, but I'm wondering how many of this class of player there truly are.

Avatar
#6 jeremywilhelm
January 13 2012, 11:14AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Good stuff as usual brother!

Avatar
#7 everton fc
January 13 2012, 11:16AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
icedawg_42 wrote:

As far as the salary/cap hit...RossCreekNation put it very well on twitter: Daymond Langkow & Rene Bourque's cap hits = Mike Cammalleri & Lee Stempniak's cap hits. IMO the current value for that money is better spent!!!

Good comparison, icedawg.

Still, Cammy's not worth the salary. And he truly is a 60-point player these days.

My sense is they were shopping Bourque and this is the best deal they could turn.

I'll alwys be pessimistic about Jay and King. So my pessimistic side wonders what another GM might have parlayed for Regehr... Langkow... Bourque.

Still, Cammy is more valuable to us than Bourque. Agreed. He's certainly the type of "piece" a team looking to get into the playoffs and perhaps doing a little damage in the first few rounds would look for, regardless of price. Agreed.

Still... If the Flames remain outside the playoff spots by the trade deadline... with no hopes of getting in...

Who pays? What's are the consequences to both GM and coach? Me thinks the coach goes first...

But...

Avatar
#8 icedawg_42
January 13 2012, 11:18AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@everton fc

Yup - when I heard his cap hit last night, it raised eyebrows, but he's such an upgrade on Bork that I think im ok with it...I wouldn't count on any big moves at the deadline now, unless there's some kind of Bouwmeester for cheaper top 4 guy or something wierd...like I said, I dont think much will happen.

Avatar
#9 Timo Seppa
January 13 2012, 11:19AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Flames were never going to rebuild. As a fan, you can just hope they retool wisely. Tough to make much headway when you're capped out, which is why you can't hope for any big wins on the likes of waiver pickups of Blake Comeau or swapping a bad Bourque contract for a bad Cammalleri contract. The acid test is what they do when some of the current salaries come off the books.

Avatar
#10 everton fc
January 13 2012, 11:21AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
maimster wrote:

I'm a bit more inclined to hold on to the "good" than the "bad" in your analysis, but also believe the "cynical" is right on. I'm not worried about the change in direction - everyone has a different definition of what that means anyway, and trading away a marginal prospect when you're getting rid of a bad contract/player for a better player isn't that big a deal. My biggest fear is that the Flames management makes all moves with an eye to keeping the public happy, and while that's understandable to a degree, making tough decisions is one of the hallmarks of good leaders.

One question, Kent: you noted players in the "Bergeron, Kesler, Datsyuk" mold and while I agree the Flames don't have one of those guys, I'm not sure many teams do (mainly because those always seem to be the three guys listed when referencing this particular class of players). I'm curious, off the top of your head, other guys that fit this description. I can think of a few, but I'm wondering how many of this class of player there truly are.

Corey Perry's one. Patrick Sharp's another.

Claude Giroux... Jason Spezza... Jamie Benn...

Zach Parise...

And didn't Feaster just say he wanted to add some size, with the signing of Jones??

Again, the direction here is confusing...

Or is it?

Avatar
#12 everton fc
January 13 2012, 11:32AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Off topic... But if the Caps send Jeff Schultz down... He'd have to clear waivers, no?

I'd take a chance on this kid. But we have no room. No cap room.

He was +50 in 09-10.

If Hunter and the Caps want to shake up their team... Perhaps they take Sarich for Schultz?

Their going to demote him anyways... so probably don't want to add to their cap.

Erskine's on the pines, as well. Both seem destined to depart.

Avatar
#13 sam67
January 13 2012, 11:34AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Think the player for player swap is ok. I find it a bit confusing as to what this teams aversion to keeping 2nd round picks is? The claim they want to improve the high skill quotient of the team yet they continue to void themselves of the picks that may help solve that problem. Then there is the aquisition of a goalie when we are fairly well stocked in that department. A goalie playing in Europe no less with no mention of a move over here.

Avatar
#14 maimster
January 13 2012, 11:36AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Good list. I didn't include Eric Staal (but did include Jordan), definitely had Toews (hadn't noticed his soft circumstances). Would have included Richards (without looking closely at NYR, trying to understand their move up the standings and I pin it on him). I think Detroit is staying near elite in league only because of Datsyuk/Zetterberg and are headed for a big fall one day.

Avatar
#15 SmellOfVictory
January 13 2012, 11:37AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Barring some kind of weird synergy thing (Bourque finding his new "Langkow" in Plekanec), the trade looks like a clear win for the Flames in terms of current NHLers exchanged. I'm actually more interested in the Holland/Ramo swap; it could be that neither of them ever has a major impact on an NHL team, but Ramo is allegedly quite good, and I personally like Holland a lot (I know the scouts don't, but who knows). The picks are picks, and probably do a decent job of evening out the value between Cammy and Bourque - a value that's further balanced by differing team needs.

Avatar
#16 SmellOfVictory
January 13 2012, 11:38AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I haven't looked at their numbers recently, but I assume Richards and/or Kopitar might be guys who Kent would've included.

Avatar
#17 everton fc
January 13 2012, 11:43AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
SmellOfVictory wrote:

Barring some kind of weird synergy thing (Bourque finding his new "Langkow" in Plekanec), the trade looks like a clear win for the Flames in terms of current NHLers exchanged. I'm actually more interested in the Holland/Ramo swap; it could be that neither of them ever has a major impact on an NHL team, but Ramo is allegedly quite good, and I personally like Holland a lot (I know the scouts don't, but who knows). The picks are picks, and probably do a decent job of evening out the value between Cammy and Bourque - a value that's further balanced by differing team needs.

Ramo's only 25. Still a "prospect".

Time will tell. I still think they shopped Bourque and this si the best deal they could get.

And Bourque really had to go.

Avatar
#20 dick
January 13 2012, 12:05PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@everton fc

What Feaster said about getting bigger when he traded for Jones he was talking specifically about getting bigger at the Center position, which made sense when you look at Horak, Morrison and take in to consideration Backlund doesn't play big.

Avatar
#21 SmellOfVictory
January 13 2012, 12:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Kent Wilson wrote:

Mike Richards you mean I assume.

Maybe a few years ago. He's been terrible in LA this year, full stop. I don't know if he's pouting or what, but he has fallen off a cliff.

Yeah, I should've specified. I assume it's because he's always hung over, as opposed to only being hung over half the time in Philly.

Avatar
#22 Dr. Nick
January 13 2012, 12:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

While Cammalleri may not return to his 08/09 form, I think the difference between Bourque and Cammalleri is that Cammalleri has more potential to become an impact player for the Flames than Bourque does for the Habs.

When it comes to cap space, it isn't how much you have, but what you do with what you have. Plenty of teams blow all their cap space on junk, including Montreal, and end up with hangover's remorse. Calgary will have plenty of cap space this summer, a little less than before, but more than enough. If Feaster makes the right moves, this cap problem will mean nothing. We still can free up more cap space via trades or waivers, and maybe Cammalleri's salary will light a fire under Feaster's butt to trade players being force fed ice time because of their salary like Stajan, Babchuk and Sarich. It may also give a little more motivation to move some players that may get you better prospects and higher draft picks like Jay-Bo, Kipper or Joker at the deadline if the Flames nosedive.

As for picks and prospects, it is a gamble on who wins this, Montreal has the better odds, but it is still a scratch ticket vs. a Lotto 649 ticket.

Who knows who will win this trade long term, that is up to the future to decide, but I think Cammalleri gives us a better chance to win the trade.

Avatar
#23 ChinookArch
January 13 2012, 12:44PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

For me this deal is addition by subtraction. Bourque is a talent, but he will never be the player that he could be, or more importantly the player the Flames need him to be. He is the definition of the 'casual play' that Brent Sutter was so upset about last season. Quite frankly, casual players and play have plagued this team since the lockout. I'm not happy with the loss of another 2nd round pick, but I will be patient and judge Feaster after the trade deadline, to see what moves he can make to replenish the teams future assets. For now, I'll enjoy watching Cammi in crimson red again.

Avatar
#24 JayD54
January 13 2012, 01:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

This trade has been bad mouthed as much as its been lauded.

My opinion is that its a good trade for Calgary. We get a gunner whos ability to put the puck in the net wearing Flames livery is well documented. He is an upgrade on Bourque and a year younger.

One of the scribes (I will not call him a reporter or journalist as I think he does not warrant the promotion) has said its a backward step. On the contrary, I think Feaster has stealthily added another asset in Ramo (Jay must be convinced he can get Karri back to be successful in North America!). As well, this club is still looking at having 10 UFAs at seasons end. If, as that same scribe writes, there is no playoff future for this roster (and I might have a tendency to agree some nights) then there is still a huge opportunity for a rebuild, a rebuild that includes some of the current players who may end up playing lesser roles on a more talented team.

Avatar
#25 schevvy
January 13 2012, 01:12PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

So I asked this question in the live chat last night, and I'll ask it again: who does Cammy play with? People seem to want to split up Jokinen-Iginla-Glencross, however they have not been great scoring chance wise and have been riding the percentages for a little bit now. Here's how I would slot the Flames forward lines on Saturday:

Cammelleri - Backlund - Iginla Glencross - Jokinen - Stempniak Byron - Jones - Comeau Kostopoulos - Horak - Jackman

I assume Brent will keep Joker-Iggy-Glencross together, but hey, you never know. Anyone here know how Cammy and Iggy were together 5 on 5 in 08/09? I know they had a good PP back then but not sure how they did ES wise.

Avatar
#27 Derzie
January 13 2012, 01:20PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Why does salary matter so much on these boards? Does the cost of your team really mean anything on the ice? Are you an owner (fantasy or reality)? The purpose of the cap is so everyone gets a fair shake at the player pool. If Jay Bo gets 7mil who cares? Does that mean Feaster can just pick another guy he wants to pay 7 mil to in his place? There are only 6 D-men and he's good enough to be 1 of them. Up to the coach to determine the pairings based on something other than salary. That said, the fact that Cammelleri gets 3 mil more than Bourque is none of your business. Is he a better player? That's your business. All signs point to 'yes he is' especially when attitude and playoff performance are part of the equation.

Avatar
#28 icedawg_42
January 13 2012, 01:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

on Ramo - he's been around...his numbers (including about 30 games in the NHL) have never been all that great...he spent some mediocre time in the KHL as well...but the last 2 years in the KHL have been quite stellar...so its going to be really tough to get a read on what he really is until we see him get another shot to play some significant time in the NHL.

Avatar
#29 schevvy
January 13 2012, 01:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Kent Wilson wrote:

however they have not been great scoring chance wise and have been riding the percentages for a little bit now.

Yes to the latter, an emphatic no to the former. The Flames first line of Jokinen-Iginla-Glencross has been good in the same sense that the Wild were good for the first 30 games of the season. Most evenings they get their heads beat in in terms of chances and possession. Only good bounces and some PP goals has them swimming anywhere near even.

I would break them up sooner rather than later personally. Watching them play against Parise the other night was like a man against boys.

moi bad, I meant to say people don't want to split Glenny-Joker-Iggy up because they have been scoring. However, their scoring chance ratios have not been good and only good percentages have masked their bad possession. Sorry about that.

Avatar
#30 Dr. Nick
January 13 2012, 01:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

@schevvy

I would keep Joker-Iggy-GlenX together and ride the wave as long as possible. If they are playing well together and I think they are, then why not. Put Cammalleri with Backlund and Stemps for now and Tangs when he gets back. I would try to get two lines who can score before I try the overloading of one line. Save that for the powerplay. Brent may mess around with the lines when more players get healthy, but I would prefer balanced scoring over trying to get one deadly line.

Avatar
#31 the-wolf
January 13 2012, 01:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Great article Kent.

- I guess this means Iginla is going nowhere. Not this season anyways. But does Kipper move?

- Is it just me or would it have made a lot more sense, given this move, to have found a way to keep Langkow and Regehr?

- End of the day the trade makes us better and lets us out of a terrible contract. That said, whatever happened to no more 'deficit spending?' I hate lsoing and prospects or picks at this stage.

- Interesting to see if Iggy re-signs for 3 more years and then Jokinen and Cammy at a reduced price in order to match up with Tanguay's contract.

- Wonder where Baertschi fits into this next year?

- Flame swin short term, but I disagree with the track they're on.

- Clearly ownership is dictating the team philosophy - "WIN NOW!" Ot at least, "Go for 8th now!"

Avatar
#32 the-wolf
January 13 2012, 02:02PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2012/01/13/spector_flames_getting_it_wrong_in_calgary/

This basically sums up my opinion of the trade.

Avatar
#33 Rain Dogs
January 13 2012, 02:21PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@the-wolf

I agree.

What makes people so certain that the PP will be improved with Cammy? One outlier season here?

He was the top PP forward minutes/60 on Montreal. Their powerplay is brutal! 13.2%

Sure, you can say it's different players etc. But I don't see the certainty that Cammy will come here and blow the doors off.

1. We aren't making the playoffs. With or without Superman nevermind Cammy. 2 pts more than last year, same games. We played .755 hockey last year games 46-82 and didn't make it last year.

2. Our core is older than Bos, Van, Chi, Pitt and they're good! We're mediocre!

Fine, trade Bourque, but don't get ingredients for a losing recipe in return.

Sorry Cammy, I do luv ya, but this isn't the time for you here (and I know I'm posting too much, but I'm home sick...so sue me.)

Avatar
#34 shutout
January 13 2012, 02:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I like the trade because I think that the compete level from Cammalleri over the balance of the season is going to be higher than for Bourque. The other aspect is that should the Flames decide to change course in the summer or next year, Cammalleri is easier to move and will bring more back than trying to move Bourque.

Ramo at 25 is no longer a prospect. He is either in the NHL or he stays in Europe. The only reason for having him included in the deal is that the Flames are planning on moving Kiprusoff, either at the deadline if the team falls out or at the draft, or if they have lost all faith in Irving and Karlsson to be their goaltender of the future.

Like Holland as a prospect and think that losing him and giving up another second round pick is damaging to this teams future. The only people that should believe that a second round pick wont amount to anything are the people that have crap for scouts and shouldn't be in the hockey world as an occupation.

Have to think that this summer the Flames and Iginla hammer out a three year extention to bring him to age 38. If it cant get done, then maybe the writing on the wall changes to that of rebuild.

I disagree with the direction of the team. I dont think that you can do anything more than look after the owners bottom line interests by trying to stay a 7-11 place team for perpetuity and looking for luck, hope, and prayer. I think that they should have done a full rebuild last year with all of the offensive prospects avialable in last years draft, but I would argue that this year it needs to happen as well. As long as Iginla stays then the team is not going to rebuild.

My biggest question for those in the know: Would this trade have been able to go through by swapping Wahl instead of Holland and not bringing back the fifth round pick? And would that have been better for the Flames?

Avatar
#35 Kevin R
January 13 2012, 02:36PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

Wow, lots of debate supporting each side. I guess if you are a GM, you have a plan & then you have opportunities to make trades with 2 things in mind, will this trade make the Flames better today & will this trade fall into the perimeters of my plan and help the Flames in the future.So:

-Bourque for Cammi is the immediate impact, big uninterested power forward, makes bad on ice decisions that hurts the team. The times his game is on "A" mode is far fewer in the last 11/2 years. Trade is inevitable & has been shopped. The return is for a speedy small skilled forward that can score & has success here before. Questions of selfish & entitled not as big of a factor because of previous successful relationships. Team desperately in need of skilled scoring forward. +++ do deal! -Plan(?) retool on the go, Go for playoffs while playing existing & acquired young rookies & acclimitize rookies with the old veterans. Cammi does not hinder this plan. -being a seller & a buyer at the deadline, is it possible? Seems to me Feaster says yes, Leiland, Brodie, Horak, Smith, Jones, Byron, Bouma are all doing comparable jobs as some of our UFA vets getting paid way more $$$$. Same result in standings as well.

So the moral of this rant is I think Feaster is trying to have his cake & eat it & he just may pull it off. Can you imagine if he continues to sell Sarich, Moss, Kosto or Jackman(I think their returns could be huge to a top 4 contender ie. 2nd rounder) & we still make the playoffs. So what if we lose in 5 games in a playoff series, imagine kids like Backlund & Brodie & Horak & Bouma getting that playoff experience. What if we trade Kipper & Babchuk to a desperate depserate Tampa for the likes of a Connoly & 1st rounder & Roloson. Leiland gets some playoff experience & suddenly we find out if Leiland & Ramos can carry the freight next year. Wouldnt that be neat if Feaster can pull this magical playoffs & be a seller at the trade deadline at the same time. He really has nothing to lose by trying.

Avatar
#36 Redd3vil
January 13 2012, 02:37PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Kent Wilson wrote:

There isn't a lot, which is why there are only a few elite teams and why it's so hard to break from the middle class to the upper echelon.

Here's my list of guys in or near that class:

Kesler, Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Staal (Jordan and Eric), Pavelski, Backstorm, Marleau, Thornton, Bergeron, Backes, Crosby (probably on a planet all his own) and Malkin may have joined those ranks recently too.

Toews is probably in there as well, although he plays such soft circumstances it's hard to be sure. Pavelski is close.

Giroux might get there one day. Ovechkin was until this year.

Then there's guys like Nielsen, Hanzal who can hang with the big boys but aren't going to score a pile of points for you.

Perry and Getzlaf probably as well.

where do u put Ovi now days ?

Avatar
#37 Parallex
January 13 2012, 02:41PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
the-wolf wrote:

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2012/01/13/spector_flames_getting_it_wrong_in_calgary/

This basically sums up my opinion of the trade.

Ummmm... yeah.

My Co-worker (Habs Fan) dropped that on my desk this morning. I promptly went about doing what should have been done by Spectors supervisor... editing it.

That articule is filled with half-truths, unproven suppositions, and lies by omission.

Avatar
#38 jeremywilhelm
January 13 2012, 02:53PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

@Parallex

Like i said on Twitter. I was on the fence about the trade until i saw Spectors comments panning the trade, the. I knew it was a great trade. Spector is tuuuurrrrible.

Avatar
#39 zachg
January 13 2012, 03:00PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Hello all, I would like to first say I really like adding a top 6 forward of Cammy's skill. Is he a big cap hit? Yes. Is he a guy that can be a game changer? Yes. Is he having a crappy year? Yes. Can he have a big year? Yes. All the questions for this guy can be answered with history and stats. At the same time i look at bourque and i just cant answer some of the questions with the same certanty. I see both sides of the win/win, But hands down cgy wins this. Bourque is a ok player, but we need goals not inconsistancy which is our idenity, Hopefully this puts a little bit of a culture change in the team.I dont mean cammy ,i mean things will continue to change if this crap goes on. I just watch bourque and say really we have to deal with this for another ...how many years?!! oh god... i was expecting maybe a late first at this point and would be happy. Ijust wanna say to the pestimists out there who would you want on your team?

Avatar
#40 zachg
January 13 2012, 03:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

PS- My wife is from montreal and she was pissed and that was the best part of the deal hahahahahaha i was singing olayolay lol

Avatar
#41 RexLibris
January 13 2012, 03:13PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props
Kent Wilson wrote:

Mike Richards you mean I assume.

Maybe a few years ago. He's been terrible in LA this year, full stop. I don't know if he's pouting or what, but he has fallen off a cliff.

I blame the pancakes.

Avatar
#42 everton fc
January 13 2012, 03:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Kevin R wrote:

Wow, lots of debate supporting each side. I guess if you are a GM, you have a plan & then you have opportunities to make trades with 2 things in mind, will this trade make the Flames better today & will this trade fall into the perimeters of my plan and help the Flames in the future.So:

-Bourque for Cammi is the immediate impact, big uninterested power forward, makes bad on ice decisions that hurts the team. The times his game is on "A" mode is far fewer in the last 11/2 years. Trade is inevitable & has been shopped. The return is for a speedy small skilled forward that can score & has success here before. Questions of selfish & entitled not as big of a factor because of previous successful relationships. Team desperately in need of skilled scoring forward. +++ do deal! -Plan(?) retool on the go, Go for playoffs while playing existing & acquired young rookies & acclimitize rookies with the old veterans. Cammi does not hinder this plan. -being a seller & a buyer at the deadline, is it possible? Seems to me Feaster says yes, Leiland, Brodie, Horak, Smith, Jones, Byron, Bouma are all doing comparable jobs as some of our UFA vets getting paid way more $$$$. Same result in standings as well.

So the moral of this rant is I think Feaster is trying to have his cake & eat it & he just may pull it off. Can you imagine if he continues to sell Sarich, Moss, Kosto or Jackman(I think their returns could be huge to a top 4 contender ie. 2nd rounder) & we still make the playoffs. So what if we lose in 5 games in a playoff series, imagine kids like Backlund & Brodie & Horak & Bouma getting that playoff experience. What if we trade Kipper & Babchuk to a desperate depserate Tampa for the likes of a Connoly & 1st rounder & Roloson. Leiland gets some playoff experience & suddenly we find out if Leiland & Ramos can carry the freight next year. Wouldnt that be neat if Feaster can pull this magical playoffs & be a seller at the trade deadline at the same time. He really has nothing to lose by trying.

As much as I respect our 4th line... Moving Kosto and Jackman to give room for Bouma, once he's moved down from the 2nd line, and Nemisz, or even Desbiens... I'd support this...

But our 4th line would also be a perfect playoff 4th line.

I think Moss would be moved if healthy. And Kipper to Tampa for the deal you propose... I'd take that.

As for Ramo... I have more confidence at the moment in Taylor down on the farm (.940 sv pct) than I do in Ramo, as Ramo is not even on the continent. Roloson would at least help in the interim.

Avatar
#43 Graham
January 13 2012, 04:18PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

From a 'this year' hockey point of view, the trade makes some sense. The Flames add a top 6 forward with some natural offensive talent, and move out Bourque, who hasn't been effective since the injury / trade of Langkow. (I must admit that I wish we had added a $6 million center)

From a future point of view, next season the Flames currently have committed $25.50 million in cap space for 4 players (Iggy, Cammalleri, Bouw and Kipper), $36.5 million if you throw in a unmoveable Stajan, plus Tanquay and Gio.

Implications for next year? A little over $14 million to sign / replace a whole bunch of UFA / RFA players. At this point you almost have to resign Jokinen, which simply isn't going to leave a lot of money for anything else. Feaster had better spend it wisely...

Avatar
#44 NateBaldwin
January 13 2012, 04:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I don't want to bad mouth a player, but I felt like bourque's contract was trending towards being more of a boat anchor than an asset. Maybe not this year, but with four years on the deal, and considering i felt we'd already seen his value peak, the only thing left for his contract was depreciation.

Also I wonder if, and personally hope that conroy played a hand in this deal in some way. @shutout

I think that goalies develop slowly so at 25 the prospect tag may still be appropriate.

Avatar
#45 the forgotten man
January 13 2012, 04:49PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Graham wrote:

From a 'this year' hockey point of view, the trade makes some sense. The Flames add a top 6 forward with some natural offensive talent, and move out Bourque, who hasn't been effective since the injury / trade of Langkow. (I must admit that I wish we had added a $6 million center)

From a future point of view, next season the Flames currently have committed $25.50 million in cap space for 4 players (Iggy, Cammalleri, Bouw and Kipper), $36.5 million if you throw in a unmoveable Stajan, plus Tanquay and Gio.

Implications for next year? A little over $14 million to sign / replace a whole bunch of UFA / RFA players. At this point you almost have to resign Jokinen, which simply isn't going to leave a lot of money for anything else. Feaster had better spend it wisely...

Great post Graham.

Assuming that your math skills are sharp, it does lead to a lot of questions for next year. Although I am not a fan of feaster and loathe king, I can only go on the hope that they have a big picture master plan and that the Cammi trade is just one more chess move to ultimate victory.

My biggest concern is that if one wants to legitimately run for the cup for a 4-5 year span, then jtiming is more important than anything else. By that I mean that you need the right mix of cheap drafted youth that is gained via 3-4 good consecutive drafts. This is generally achieved by a strong scouting staff, not trading away your early draft picks and a GM with a nose for talent...sadly still not sure if flames have any of these variables soundly in place. The other half tof the equation is keeping existing talent happy and having a little in the piggy bank to buy a couple of gunslingers to fill inn any remaining holes...here the flames are in better shape but in my opinion are over committed to some questionable talent and in jsome cases strapped to a couple of anchors.

With the Cammi trade, it helps the veteran side of the equation, but may be coming at the wrong time...ie For lack of of a better term, Feaster is blowing his load too soon...the young cheap impact talent is not in place yet to complement the expensive older guys. To complicate things even more, you only have a good 2 more impact years from Iginla and kipper, so my assumption is that feaster is saying Damn the Torpedoes and praying to God that Iginla and kipper have enough in the tank for a 2004 redux...if not, then jay and ken are done in this town.

My only advice to feaster is to get Gelinas on the phone and tell him to hit the gym and be ready for April...the flames need him more than Iginla or kipper if they want to be playing into may and June...this shouldn't be a stretch since the one consistency of the org is their Welcome Back Kotter approach to player personnel decisions...is Fleury still skating???

Avatar
#46 the-wolf
January 13 2012, 04:59PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Parallex wrote:

Ummmm... yeah.

My Co-worker (Habs Fan) dropped that on my desk this morning. I promptly went about doing what should have been done by Spectors supervisor... editing it.

That articule is filled with half-truths, unproven suppositions, and lies by omission.

Interesting, but you need to expand please.

We win the trade, IMO (though no gurantee), but I don't like giving up more prospects (3rd/4thline max potential or not) and picks, especially 2nd rounders. I don't agree with the refusal to change direction and I agree with the gist of the article that such a refusal could have damning consequences.

1 for 1 I'd have been all over the move.

Avatar
#47 the-wolf
January 13 2012, 05:01PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Read this too:

http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=384950

McKenzie is much better than Spector for sure.

Avatar
#48 RexLibris
January 13 2012, 05:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Spector used to get regularly booed in Edmonton too because he called out management and said they should have taken their chips off the table and cashed them all in after the Cup run in '06.

I get that what Spector wrote would royally tick off most Flames fans. Trust me, I've been there. He called the Oilers a team of in-betweens and never-gonna-bes and he was right. But while Spector can be a little divisive sometimes and he loves to call out mistakes as he sees them, he can be right. I'm not a Spector apologist, there are some things on which with him I will usually disagree. That being said, his generalizations about what Flames fans ought to support and not support aside, I have to say that overall I generally agree with his take on things. And in this regard, I tend to agree, but I'm not a Flames fan, so frankly what I think is only worth what anyone reading this believes it to be.

My view is that this trade, while positive in that it brings in a better player right now and moves out one that had shown a clear inability to bring a consistent work ethic to the game, is only serving to further entrench the franchise in the now, at the expense of the future. If that's what Flames fans want, well then, who cares what anyone else says. You've got a better team today than you did yesterday.

I know the statistical evidence for the % of 2nd rounders that turn out to be good NHLers is in the 15% rance, but what I don't understand is using that metric to try and justify trading those same picks in consecutive years. Sure, a 15% chance isn't great, and the Flames have more failures than most at the draft table, but does not even taking a chance somehow improve those odds? To quote: "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take". I have noticed a great deal of apathy and disregard for draft picks outside of the first round in many comments made here. I get that feeling. I used to feel that those selections were just a waste of time because it seemed like the team I cheer for couldn't have found their behinds with both hands at the draft table. It was always the New Jersey's and the Chicago's that were finding the right players.

The fact that Feaster has moved out both 2nd rounders for the next two years isn't a sign of a management team thinking about tomorrow. And if he'll move those picks and a prospect like Holland for Cammalleri any fan would have to ask himself: "what is the price for Baertschi?" I believe that Feaster is going to keep moving players and assets until he feels the Flames are safely into the playoffs. And what Spector said about a 1st round matchup with Vancouver, well, I can't say that he's wrong, and I have said here that I'd like to see the Flames kick the Canucks out in the first round.

So, like I said, if Flames fans wanted to improve right now, you did. You got the best player and shipped out an inconsistent player with a bad term contract. If Flames fans are worried about tomorrow, well I can't say that right now I would disagree with them.

Anyway, sorry if I've offended anyone, but good luck on the playoff run.

Avatar
#49 Dr. Nick
January 13 2012, 06:40PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
the-wolf wrote:

Read this too:

http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=384950

McKenzie is much better than Spector for sure.

I have to admit, I am not a fan of that article. Bob is great and I am a huge fan plus he is 100X better than Spector, but that article is almost like an athlete apologizing after venting to the media. You know that the athlete meant what he said and is only apologizing so he doesn't get egged in the parking lot or booed in a grocery store. Bob seems more like he is hedging his bet than making an honest opinion. The stats in the article don't count for anything because comparing goals per game is like comparing plus/minus. Bourque may have more goals per game than Cammalleri over the last three seasons but Cammalleri recovered from more injuries than Bourque, dealt with more checkers than Bourque because he didn't have a player like Iggy to keep them away from him, plus he played a different system under a different coach and played different teams more regularly. Cammalleri was facing more higher quality goalies like Thomas and Ludquivst on a regular basis than Bourque was, so that might account for some off those stats. So to include stats for why your opinion changed that are completely subjective, is just Bob's way of apologizing to Hab fans for saying that the Habs got roasted by the trade.

Avatar
#50 ChinookArch
January 13 2012, 07:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

@RexLibris

I completely agree with you on the value of second picks and as you quoted, "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take". You're also right to say that if fans are looking for a rebuild that trading away 2nd rounders is not a winning strategy. That said, this trade as it stands is not neccessarily indicative of what will come in terms of future deals or the overall future of the Flames. I will (try) to be patient with Feasters activities until I see what he has accomplished before the start next season. I will then examine his entire body of work as the Flames GM.

I may be alone in my view, but I think Feaster has improved the Flames (long term) a lot since starting, especially given the lack of wiggle room left behind by the last management team. Here is a quick review of his moves since becoming the full time GM that improve the Flames longterm:

- drafted skilled fast players at draft (this may seem trivial, but it has not happened here in a long time.

- turned around the Flames farm team in Abbotsford, by stacking the team with NHL talent, in particular on defense. He also hired an offensively minded coach, in Troy Ward. The Heat were terrible last year and at Christmas were near the top of the standings.

- traded Regaer for a faster and younger player (Butler), as well as opened up cap space.

- traded Langkow for a faster and younger player (Stempniak), as well as opened up cap space.

- picked Blake Comeau (a faster and young player) off of the waiver wire.

- traded an AHLer that was not going to make the big team for a speedy, gritty and young player (Blair Jones).

- rid the team of an inconsistent player with an onerous long contract for a faster, more intense difference maker with 2 years left on his contract (Cammalleri).

When you look his entire body of work, I think most will acknowledge that some progress has been made.

Comments are closed for this article.