Flames trade Karlsson to the Blackhawks

Kent Wilson
January 21 2013 04:29PM

News just coming down the pipe now that the Flame shave traded Henrik Karlsson to the Chicago Blackhawks in exchange for a Senators 7th round pick (which the Hawks owned).

On the one hand, it's amazing the Flames could get anything at all for Karlsson, who has proven to be a mediocre goaltender at best at this level. On the other hand, the organization originally paid a sixth round pick for him, so if you're keeping close tabs on the debits and credits in the org's ledger, well...add a bit more red to the books.

Either way, Karlsson is gone, ridding the Flames of a needless contract and likely resolving the issue of who will be Kipper's back-up this year permanently.

Although with Karlsson gone, it may give the Flames a chance to ink one of Danny Taylor or Barry Brust to a two-way NHL deal, which could make Leland Irving's life complicated again.

I guess we'll see.

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 Ryan Pike
January 21 2013, 04:38PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

If you claim a player on waivers, you have to (a) pay the waiver fee and (b) keep them on your NHL roster.

The Blackhawks can keep Hank in the AHL and don't risk losing him for nothing.

The Flames get a late pick in a deep draft.

Avatar
#2 SmellOfVictory
January 21 2013, 04:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I am legitimately amazed that they got a return for him. Nice.

Which of Brust/Taylor would interest you most on a 2-way deal, Kent? I like Taylor for the consistency/age thing, but Brust is a hilariously entertaining guy to watch.

Avatar
#3 Colin.S
January 21 2013, 04:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

So why didn't chicago just take him on Waivers then......

Either way one of Brust or Taylor is getting a contract most likely, however they would have to clear waivers I asume.

Avatar
#4 RexLibris
January 21 2013, 04:33PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

If Karlsson was waived, why not simply claim him?

Either way, I would agree, a 7th round pick is probably more than he is worth. Having said that, based on Murphy's Law and Fate being a fickle woman, can we expect that Karlsson will pitch a shutout against the Flames later this season?

Avatar
#5 Willi P
January 21 2013, 04:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

As per Colin S, why didn't they? Wouldn't Calgary have been on the hook for half of his salary too? Confused.

Avatar
#7 The Goalie 1976
January 21 2013, 04:37PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Why would any team trade for this player that clearly by passing through waivers has ZERO value. Ditto for Irving.

This team needs 2 goalies, assuming they due the prudent thing and trade Kipper at the deadline, on their way to a lottery pick.

Calgary should be pimping Kipper to the Hawks (who would be instantly the class of the west) for Nick Leddy OR Patrick Sharp AND Croy Crawford. That would help both teams, and ensure Calgary gets a center, and Nathan McKinnon.

Avatar
#9 The Goalie 1976
January 21 2013, 04:41PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Ryan Pike wrote:

If you claim a player on waivers, you have to (a) pay the waiver fee and (b) keep them on your NHL roster.

The Blackhawks can keep Hank in the AHL and don't risk losing him for nothing.

The Flames get a late pick in a deep draft.

This seems correct. And Karlsson is a decent 3rd goalie option. You have to figure they are going to promote someone from Abbottsford instead of grabbing Bishop from Ottawa. That kid has a future.

Avatar
#10 SmellOfVictory
January 21 2013, 04:45PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Ryan Pike wrote:

If you claim a player on waivers, you have to (a) pay the waiver fee and (b) keep them on your NHL roster.

The Blackhawks can keep Hank in the AHL and don't risk losing him for nothing.

The Flames get a late pick in a deep draft.

You also drop to the bottom of the waiver list, do you not? Or is that just a fantasy hockey thing that I'm getting confused with reality?

Avatar
#11 T&A4Flames
January 21 2013, 04:46PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Bye Karlsson, I'll miss your fist-pumping.

Avatar
#12 Willi P
January 21 2013, 04:46PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Kent and Ryan

OK, thought maybe it was that after I posted. Also, since there are no more re-entry waivers, they can't lose him going back up (I think)

Avatar
#13 Jonathan Happy
January 21 2013, 04:49PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
RexLibris wrote:

If Karlsson was waived, why not simply claim him?

Either way, I would agree, a 7th round pick is probably more than he is worth. Having said that, based on Murphy's Law and Fate being a fickle woman, can we expect that Karlsson will pitch a shutout against the Flames later this season?

I absolutley expect him to Rex.

Avatar
#14 Colin.S
January 21 2013, 04:52PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Another option no one is thinking of is that there could be trouble or injury for Chicago's AHL goalies that came up in the last 24 hours that made needing an AHL goalie a priority.

Avatar
#15 Clay
January 21 2013, 04:59PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Colin.S wrote:

So why didn't chicago just take him on Waivers then......

Either way one of Brust or Taylor is getting a contract most likely, however they would have to clear waivers I asume.

Because they would have had to keep him in the NHL.

This way they would not have to waive him themselves.

Avatar
#16 Vintage Flame
January 21 2013, 05:05PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Karlsson's days were numbered as soon as he got that flashy new paint job on his mask.

I blame Pike for pointing it out to everyone. Maybe Hank can give the mask to Irving, along with his number, so Leland can ditch the #37!

Didn't Irv wear #35 originally anyways when he was drafted?

... Going to be kind of awkward when they call Hank the "Calgary Tower" when he plays in Chicago.

Avatar
#17 Vintage Flame
January 21 2013, 05:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I think what is important here is that Karlsson's trade now opens a roster spot for the Flames to bring over Ramo after the KHL ends in late Feb.

There was no room for Hank in Abby and he was going there as #3, so really, the Flames got a great deal here by getting the 7th rounder.

Avatar
#18 Jonathan Happy
January 21 2013, 06:03PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Vintage Flame wrote:

I think what is important here is that Karlsson's trade now opens a roster spot for the Flames to bring over Ramo after the KHL ends in late Feb.

There was no room for Hank in Abby and he was going there as #3, so really, the Flames got a great deal here by getting the 7th rounder.

Wow late February!! That means the Flames can ditch Irving that much sooner. Ramo would still have to ink a deal with the team right?

Avatar
#19 BJ
January 21 2013, 06:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Too bad, i hoped to see him in edmonton. He'd get more of a chancge there. Can't expect a guy to play lights out and steal wins on the second game of back to backs when you only give him 10-12 games in a year. Or kipper gets pulled (many times at the fault of the team) and he gets played in the worst situations.

Irving better be playing tonight.

Avatar
#20 Vintage Flame
January 21 2013, 06:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Jonathan Happy

Yes I believe that is right. But by ridding themselves of the Karlsson contract, they could ink Ramo.

Still trying to search the CBA to get firm opinion on that though.

Kent will probably have the answer before I do.

Avatar
#21 BJ
January 21 2013, 06:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Don't worry, with Ramo next year, Irving's life will get complicated anyway... unless someone is moved... hmmmm

Avatar
#22 smith
January 21 2013, 06:40PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Considering the flames last two seventh round picks I am quite happy getting another. Which is also why I am opposed to giving picks for Modin and PLL.

Avatar
#23 ChinookArch
January 21 2013, 07:28PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I'm all smiles. This is great news. Chicago seems to be a consistent trade partner for Feaster. That relationship might really pay off one day, since the Hawks have a well balanced team, we could scrounge a decent young center man out of them.

Avatar
#24 T&A4Flames
January 21 2013, 08:03PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Jonathan Happy wrote:

Wow late February!! That means the Flames can ditch Irving that much sooner. Ramo would still have to ink a deal with the team right?

Is there any re-entry waivers on Ramo? Didn't Detroit lose Nabokov to the Isle's that way when he came back.

Avatar
#25 RKD
January 21 2013, 08:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Not too surprising considering they decided Irving was their guy over Karlsson. Plus with Rammo coming in and Ortio/Taylor in the org. someone had to be the odd man out.

If Irving doesn't perform in his 4 starts or less, he too will be shown the door as well.

Avatar
#26 Stockley
January 21 2013, 08:48PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
T&A4Flames wrote:

Is there any re-entry waivers on Ramo? Didn't Detroit lose Nabokov to the Isle's that way when he came back.

There shouldn't be any waivers on Ramo. Same situation as Radulov last year with the Preds. We own the rights to the player. Nabby was a free agent when the Wings tried to sign him, which meant he had to be subjected to waivers.

I could be wrong of course. Especially since I haven't seen all the ins and outs of the new CBA yet and I'm sure there are a lot of changes.

Avatar
#27 HongKongHockeyFan
January 21 2013, 10:38PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Yes, amazing they were able to unload the Calgary Tower for a 7th round pick.

However, I suspect that could not be a straight up trade as Karlsson had a one-way contract for $862,500. The Flames must have ate some this salary to cement the trade. If they didn't Kudo's to Feaster!

Avatar
#28 Steve
January 22 2013, 09:40AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

"On the one hand, it's amazing the Flames could get anything at all for Karlsson, who has proven to be a mediocre goaltender at best at this level. On the other hand, the organization originally paid a sixth round pick for him, so if you're keeping close tabs on the debits and credits in the org's ledger, well...add a bit more red to the books."

So would you recommend trading Johnny G for a 3rd rounder to even that out? ;)

Avatar
#29 suba steve
January 22 2013, 09:53AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Steve wrote:

"On the one hand, it's amazing the Flames could get anything at all for Karlsson, who has proven to be a mediocre goaltender at best at this level. On the other hand, the organization originally paid a sixth round pick for him, so if you're keeping close tabs on the debits and credits in the org's ledger, well...add a bit more red to the books."

So would you recommend trading Johnny G for a 3rd rounder to even that out? ;)

Yeah, I don't buy that argument either. I paid 25K for a used car. I drove it for 2.5years and dinged it up a bit. Can I expect to get my $25k back when I then try to sell it?

Avatar
#30 loudogYYC
January 22 2013, 11:30AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Steve

Flames paid a 6th rounder (Konrad Abeltshauser) and some salary to see if they found something in this big dude. They gave him a shot, he failed, Flames move on. This time they get a 7th rounder for an AHL goalie who's almost 30 years old.

I'm ok with all that. It's not the stock market, after all.

Avatar
#31 Franko J
January 22 2013, 10:21PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

As the Carpenter's once sang

"We've only Just Begun".

PL3 for a 5th. Trading Karlsson for a 7th is a start. While a 7th round pick is not perceived to be of much value in terms of an elite prospect I must say that Calgary actually does draft better in the later rounds than the earlier ones.

More picks = increased assests down the road.

On the bright side at least Feaster didn't have to give up a pick or prospect to move him.

Comments are closed for this article.