Where Do The Flames Sit Heading Into the Summer?

Ryan Pike
May 10 2013 09:14AM

 

 

Following the completion of the season, Flames general manager Jay Feaster (and several players) expressed that their team is in a decent good place going forward.

They're not entirely wrong. While the team on the ice is what it is – there are a lot of holes – but the club does have a bounty of resources at their disposal heading into the summer. A look at how the Flames sit compared to their counterparts in three areas can give a glimpse as to how the club sits, and who may be ideal trade partners going forward.

DRAFT PICKS

The Flames have nine picks in the 2013 NHL Draft. That's three firsts (their own, Pittsburgh's and St. Louis'), a third, a fourth, Columbus' fifth, a sixth and two sevenths (their own and Ottawa's). That's a lot of picks.

Only five teams have more: Buffalo, Dallas, Los Angeles, Nashville and Winnipeg. The Kings don't have a first, while Buffalo has two of them. If you're interested in picks in the first three rounds, Buffalo has five, Dallas has three, the Kings have two, Nashville has two and Winnipeg has six. Calgary has four.

On the other end of the scheme, New Jersey and the New York Rangers have four draft picks apiece, while Anaheim, Carolina and Chicago only have five. And the Rangers and Penguins have zero picks in the first two rounds between them.

This is the first time in franchise history the Flames have had three picks in round one. It will be interesting to see if they use all three or deploy some of them as trade assets in order to move up, add more picks later or trade for a roster player.

NHL CONTRACTS

If you have a lot of NHL deals for 2013-14 already, it'll be hard to do anything over the summer. If you have very few, you have flexibility. The maximum is 50.

The Flames have 30 players under contracts for 2013-14, with another 13 guys being restricted free agents. A good bet is only about half those guys will actually be retained by the organization. The only teams with fewer committed deals for next season are Winnipeg (19), St. Louis (26), Columbus (28), New Jersey (28) and Florida (29).

Teams who may be looking to unload bodies? Philadelphia (41), Detroit (40), Boston (39), Ottawa (39), Dallas (38) and the Rangers (38).

CAP SPACE

Here's where things get hairy for most of the league, as the NHL's salary cap is dropping to $64.3 million next season. Presuming that Miikka Kiprusoff doesn't retire, the Flames have roughly $19 million in cap space. If he retires  or the team buys him out, that number swells to just under $25 million. If that's the case, only the Islanders ($29.7 million) and Winnipeg ($29.3 million) would have more cap space, although the Flames undoubtedly have more actual budget room in terms of real dollars to spend than either of those clubs. In effect, the Flames would have the fattest wallets in the league heading into the summer.

Teams that are nervous include the Flyers ($70.7 million), Montreal ($65.7 million), Vancouver ($64.4 million), Anaheim ($63.4 million), Chicago ($62.6 million) and Tampa Bay ($60.9 million). There's another handful of teams that are just below them (Washington, Boston, Carolina, Pittsburgh) and have a lot of money spent but have some holes in their NHL rosters for next year (and some key bodies left to re-sign).

This obvsiously positions the Flames well to take advantage of some desperate clubs looking to shed some dollars. Calgary may be able to strip a useful player or two out of the cap crunched in the league, or, alternatively, trade cap space for salary dumps in return for some useful futures (prospects or picks).

Conclusion

The Flames are entering the off-season with an unprecedented amount of first round picks and financial flexibility. Although the team on paper is underwhelming, Flames management is at least positioned to set the club on the right path as they take their first few steps for the rebuild.

51a8cdc527ce12d222fdc583f3cf4368
Now in his third full season covering the Calgary Flames and the NHL, Ryan Pike is a Calgary native and FlamesNation's managing editor. He's trying to keep his head up, his stick on the ice and is giving it 110% every shift. You can also find his work at The Hockey Writers, the Wrestling Observer and Tough Talk MMA.
Avatar
#1 Colin.S
May 10 2013, 10:11AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props
SmellOfVictory wrote:

There seems to be a substantial likelihood that Vancouver buys out David Booth, and he'd be a great guy to use in a bottom 6/checking role, assuming he can remain somewhat healthy.

Why in the hell would Vancouver buy out David booth when they are going to move Luongo and buy out Ballard?

Avatar
#2 the-wolf
May 10 2013, 12:03PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props
Parallex wrote:

I'd actually be fine giving Horton term (4-5 year range). It's not so long that he'd fall off a cliff at the end, fills an immediate and medium-term need and I'm a big fan of Horton.

Tough figuring out dollars though... what is Horton's cost/worth in the upcoming cap environment?

What's the point in acquiring Horton though? If the goal is to rebuild then Horton's best days will be long behind him by the time the Flames are really rolling. I think that salary can be better spent elsewhere.

Avatar
#3 FireOnIce
May 10 2013, 02:39PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

After reading the trade/UFA proposals that people have posted here, I'm glad you people aren't the GM.

Nathan Horton? He's had at least 2 concussions and is probably high on the list of "keeps" for the Bruins.

David Booth? Canucks overpaid for him, and he's been injured a lot. His numbers are terrible, and he's getting older. He's like Matt Stajan - the only reason he ever had good numbers was because he played for a sh*t team. Somebody HAD to score.

Kimmo Timmonen? He's just turned 38 in March. No. Just, no.

Lecavalier? No. No. Not at all. Why are you even suggesting this?

I understand these are all fantasy scenarios, but get real. Just because the Flames stock up on picks doesn't mean those picks will mean anything in the long run. You actually have to pick a half-decent player and hope you develop them properly. This team has NEVER shown the ability to do this properly. Ovechkins and Crosbys don't just fall out of the woodwork either.

Trading for Lecavalier, or Timmonen, just to get another first is ridiculous. I'd rather the Flames trade with no one, and sign no UFAs, and give the kids we have now a chance at playing.

That said, I wouldn't mind David Clarkson, and believe him to be one of the top 3 UFAs this summer. It would definitely be an overpay, IF New Jersey lets him go. I don't think they do.

Avatar
#4 Lordmork
May 10 2013, 09:23AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Who are some useful players we could target on those cap-space teams? Alternately, who are some salary dump players, and what could we reasonably expect to obtain for taking them on? I'm assuming the team would be very careful about taking on long-term salary dumps.

Avatar
#5 Kent Wilson
May 10 2013, 09:28AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Lordmork

We'll assess the options as the off-season approaches.

Avatar
#6 Clay
May 10 2013, 09:30AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Lordmork wrote:

Who are some useful players we could target on those cap-space teams? Alternately, who are some salary dump players, and what could we reasonably expect to obtain for taking them on? I'm assuming the team would be very careful about taking on long-term salary dumps.

How about Wayne Simmonds in Philly (I can dream)

Avatar
#7 Colin.S
May 10 2013, 09:32AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Derek Roy and Nathan Horton are both UFAs at the end of the season and with out large amount of cap space and need for Forwards do either of those guy in any represent something the Flames should go after or is Derek Roys performance in Vancouver getting swept more of what we could expect from him?

Avatar
#8 Parallex
May 10 2013, 09:44AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Colin.S

I love Horton and think the Flames should make a play for him but I'd rather they stay away from Roy (except maybe on a relatively cheap 1 year deal where he basically just becomes an asset to move at the deadline).

I'd keep my eye out for the guys that teams use compliance buyouts on. Those guys strike me as ideal targets to seek-out a short-term "redemption" (i.e below fair market value)contract with.

Avatar
#9 Colin.S
May 10 2013, 09:52AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Parallex

Those guys on "redemption" deals though tend to want to sign with a contender or almost contender as going to the playoffs will raise their value, if they were to sign with Calgary there would not be any below market value deals.

Avatar
#10 KillamAll
May 10 2013, 09:52AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

If Feaster plays his cards right, we could actually see a quick turnaround to where this does not need to be a 5 year rebuild. However, the temptation of spending to the Cap and filling the team with aging, entitled players, is an all too familiar recipe for mediocrity, and I hope we don't see the Flames fall into this once again.

Avatar
#11 SmellOfVictory
May 10 2013, 09:52AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Lordmork wrote:

Who are some useful players we could target on those cap-space teams? Alternately, who are some salary dump players, and what could we reasonably expect to obtain for taking them on? I'm assuming the team would be very careful about taking on long-term salary dumps.

There seems to be a substantial likelihood that Vancouver buys out David Booth, and he'd be a great guy to use in a bottom 6/checking role, assuming he can remain somewhat healthy.

Avatar
#12 Parallex
May 10 2013, 10:09AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Colin.S wrote:

Those guys on "redemption" deals though tend to want to sign with a contender or almost contender as going to the playoffs will raise their value, if they were to sign with Calgary there would not be any below market value deals.

I disagree actually. They'll want to go someplace where they'll get to play a significant role, they won't want to go some place where they'll just be depth playing limited minutes in limited circumstances (which is what most pre-season favorites will want them as)... given that they'll be signing a sweetheart "show me" contract they make themselves attractive deadline targets for cash/cap strapped teams so they can get the best of both worlds as they can play a bigger part on a poor team initially and then get traded to a contender to finish out the year.

Avatar
#13 SeanCharles
May 10 2013, 10:20AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

The Flames have an unprecedented opportunity this offseason.

I'm pretty excited and think we will be a better team next season than we have been in each of the last 4 years..

Avatar
#14 Parallex
May 10 2013, 10:26AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Colin.S

They've been "going to move Luongo" for a while now. Not sure it happens without them being willing to take significant dollars back and buying out Ballard only might make them cap complaint after filling roster holes... if they want to attempt an upgrade at any position they'll have to find more I think.

Avatar
#15 Colin.S
May 10 2013, 10:29AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Parallex

They won't have to buy out David Booth, there will be a long line of potential suitors for that guy.

Avatar
#16 piscera.infada
May 10 2013, 10:34AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I'm not on the Horton bandwagon (not that I think he'll come here anyway, unless we greatly overpay him). I think his best hockey is behind him to the point that he will likely not contribute in any fashion once this team is ready to compete. He's also just one bad hit away from potentially ending his career (because with concussion history, you never know).

The injury history may not be a big thing to a deep team that can pay him fair market value, but as I opened with, I don't believe in any way the Flames can sign him for anything more than a ludicrous dollar figure with term.

Avatar
#17 Parallex
May 10 2013, 10:43AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Colin.S wrote:

They won't have to buy out David Booth, there will be a long line of potential suitors for that guy.

You think? With his $4,250,000.00 cap hit (in a lower cap environment), injury history, and declining production rates?

I'm skeptical of that. Who would all these suitors be?

Avatar
#18 Colin.S
May 10 2013, 10:52AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Parallex wrote:

You think? With his $4,250,000.00 cap hit (in a lower cap environment), injury history, and declining production rates?

I'm skeptical of that. Who would all these suitors be?

Anyone that can find the cap space, hell I wouldn't object to the Flames acquiring him if the price was small enough.

He can drive the play forward, bigger body and this year his PDO was stupidly low as well and he's only 27.

Yeah he's been injured a bit, but unless he's Rick Depietro injured that's not a big deal. If Gomez and Redden can both find deals, there is easily a market for David Booth.

Avatar
#19 Sincity1976
May 10 2013, 10:53AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

In terms of the RFAs the Flames will certainly sign Brodie, Backlund, Cundari, Bouma, and Breen. They will also probably sign Butler (yuck) and Byron. Patterson and Cameron won't see an extension.

So that leaves Aliu, Bancks, Nemisz, and Lamb. I don't think any of those guys are NHLers. But I could see them giving Bancks and Aliu one more contract.

That brings them up to ~9 contracts.

Avatar
#20 T&A4Flames
May 10 2013, 10:55AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Kent, Ryan, anyone with better knowledge than I have, how does the buyout thing work with salary retention?

This goes back to one of the earlier blogs but for instance, we make a trade with TBL for their 1st and take Lecavalier's stupidly monstrous contract but TBL retain $2.5mil of his cap for each of the 7 years remaining. CGY management decides to buy him out at 2/3rd his salary. Does TBL have the option to buyout that $2.5per yr? Can they buyout if CGY doesn't? Can CGY buyout if TBL doesn't?

If TBL retained some of that salary I would consider keeping Vinny at roughly $5.2mil per anyway. I'm just curious if a deal could be worked out where we get TBL 1st buy helping with cap space but not completely screwing ourselves for 7 years or longer on a buyout of over $35.5mil

Avatar
#21 Sincity1976
May 10 2013, 10:57AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I would absolutely sign Horton. He has been on the top of my 'to sign' list since it was clear the Flames were rebuilding.

He turns 28 this month so he is in the right age bracket. When he is healthy he is a dominate power forward that can play both ends of the ice. And he plays RW and we are weak there on the roster and in the system.

The Flames have the cap space to take a risk on Horton. We also have the risk tolerance since nobody is expecting us to be going for a cup next season. If Horton works out that would be a huge success in moving the franchise forward.

That said, the Flames have to be careful on term. 2 or 3 years maximum.

Avatar
#22 Colin.S
May 10 2013, 11:04AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@T&A4Flames

I don't like the idea of trading for Vinny at all, unless maybe TBL took like 3 million+ of his salary, even then by the end of that contract I couldn't even imagine what kinda player he would be. And I doubt they would be willing to part with their first just to dump him, if that was the case they wouldn't keep any salary.

Avatar
#23 T&A4Flames
May 10 2013, 11:11AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Lordmork wrote:

Who are some useful players we could target on those cap-space teams? Alternately, who are some salary dump players, and what could we reasonably expect to obtain for taking them on? I'm assuming the team would be very careful about taking on long-term salary dumps.

If teams are willing to move young players I would certainly take that option. They have to fit into the long term plans however. The more likely scenario I would not object to see happening would be gaining other assets (picks and prospects) while acquiring expensive contracts with 1yr left on them.

1st target on my list would be MTL. I would take Kaberle's contract if our 2nd came back to us. I'm not sure what we would have to give in return but I wouldn't expect it to be much. Maybe something like Paul Byron.

Avatar
#24 T&A4Flames
May 10 2013, 11:13AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Colin.S wrote:

I don't like the idea of trading for Vinny at all, unless maybe TBL took like 3 million+ of his salary, even then by the end of that contract I couldn't even imagine what kinda player he would be. And I doubt they would be willing to part with their first just to dump him, if that was the case they wouldn't keep any salary.

It was hypothetical. More of an example of what I was really trying to figure out; buyouts with salary retention.

Avatar
#25 T&A4Flames
May 10 2013, 11:14AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Clay wrote:

How about Wayne Simmonds in Philly (I can dream)

Timmonen with 1yr left @ $6mil and PHI 1st for Butler and PIT (or STL- whichever is the later) 1st.

Avatar
#26 Sincity1976
May 10 2013, 11:16AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Montreal is one of the richest franchises in the league. They can just buyout Kaberle rather then give up a high 2nd in a deep draft.

Re Lecavalier there is noway to make that happen. Tampa isn't going give up big assets to unload him and the Flames aren't in a position to take on a 33 year old with 7-years left under contract.

Avatar
#27 seve927
May 10 2013, 11:18AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
T&A4Flames wrote:

Timmonen with 1yr left @ $6mil and PHI 1st for Butler and PIT (or STL- whichever is the later) 1st.

So many possibilities. This really could be the most interesting offseason ever.

I like that one, and it may be realistic.

Avatar
#28 Parallex
May 10 2013, 11:18AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Sincity1976

Two or three years won't get it done, this is going to be Horton's only prime years UFA contract so he's got to make it count (he's also the best forward on the free agent market this year, pre-buyouts, so he'll have no shortage of people offering him more term then that).

Avatar
#29 the-wolf
May 10 2013, 11:25AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
piscera.infada wrote:

I'm not on the Horton bandwagon (not that I think he'll come here anyway, unless we greatly overpay him). I think his best hockey is behind him to the point that he will likely not contribute in any fashion once this team is ready to compete. He's also just one bad hit away from potentially ending his career (because with concussion history, you never know).

The injury history may not be a big thing to a deep team that can pay him fair market value, but as I opened with, I don't believe in any way the Flames can sign him for anything more than a ludicrous dollar figure with term.

Agreed. Horton is too old and injured to bother IMO. Flames need to think long term.

Pondering the merits of bring back a Fleury or Bryzgalov for a Couturier-type player.

On a no pressure team Bryz might actually play well or Flames could then do the buy-out instead of Philly if they wanted.

How much would that cost? Do either of those guys have a NTC?

Not sold on the idea per se, but if the idea is to bring back some talent that isn't close to 30 years old, it's something to consider (along those lines anyways).

Avatar
#30 the-wolf
May 10 2013, 11:27AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Sincity1976 wrote:

Montreal is one of the richest franchises in the league. They can just buyout Kaberle rather then give up a high 2nd in a deep draft.

Re Lecavalier there is noway to make that happen. Tampa isn't going give up big assets to unload him and the Flames aren't in a position to take on a 33 year old with 7-years left under contract.

Unless they trade for hVinny and the Flames do the buy-out.

Interesting point - should Flames target Coutuier-types of just go after more 1st rounders?

Avatar
#31 T&A4Flames
May 10 2013, 11:34AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
the-wolf wrote:

Unless they trade for hVinny and the Flames do the buy-out.

Interesting point - should Flames target Coutuier-types of just go after more 1st rounders?

With Vinny, comsider this. We trade to acquire Vinny and a VERY GOOD asset. We buy out (preferably only part, maybe half- based on my earlier question) Vinny. TBL resign him. What is that worth to TBL?

If Couturier types are available, that's what I would take. I would help quicken the rebuild. Although, if it's a top 10 pick I would consider that depending on what may still be on the board if it's a draft day deal.

Avatar
#32 T&A4Flames
May 10 2013, 11:36AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Colin.S wrote:

Derek Roy and Nathan Horton are both UFAs at the end of the season and with out large amount of cap space and need for Forwards do either of those guy in any represent something the Flames should go after or is Derek Roys performance in Vancouver getting swept more of what we could expect from him?

I would go after either of these guys but on no more than 3 year deals. I would rather sign a guy like Roy on a big salary, 1yr deal. That way we ca move him at the deadline for another 1st hopefully.

Avatar
#33 piscera.infada
May 10 2013, 11:37AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Sincity1976 wrote:

I would absolutely sign Horton. He has been on the top of my 'to sign' list since it was clear the Flames were rebuilding.

He turns 28 this month so he is in the right age bracket. When he is healthy he is a dominate power forward that can play both ends of the ice. And he plays RW and we are weak there on the roster and in the system.

The Flames have the cap space to take a risk on Horton. We also have the risk tolerance since nobody is expecting us to be going for a cup next season. If Horton works out that would be a huge success in moving the franchise forward.

That said, the Flames have to be careful on term. 2 or 3 years maximum.

I agree with Parallelx on this one. The guy will want dollars and term. If we sign him to 2-3 years, his skills will likely decline by the time he's 32 (wont be an awful player, but enough to impact his salary in his next contract). Thus, his goal will be to maximize term - making 2-3 years a non-starter.

In my mind, if the Flames make a desperate push for Horton it symbolizes that they have not learned their lesson over the past several years, and I will be joining the hoards demanding new management for this team.

Avatar
#34 T&A4Flames
May 10 2013, 11:38AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Colin.S wrote:

They won't have to buy out David Booth, there will be a long line of potential suitors for that guy.

Doubtful given his lack of production, high contract and injury history. Who can afford that and the risk involved?

Avatar
#35 T&A4Flames
May 10 2013, 11:42AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
piscera.infada wrote:

I'm not on the Horton bandwagon (not that I think he'll come here anyway, unless we greatly overpay him). I think his best hockey is behind him to the point that he will likely not contribute in any fashion once this team is ready to compete. He's also just one bad hit away from potentially ending his career (because with concussion history, you never know).

The injury history may not be a big thing to a deep team that can pay him fair market value, but as I opened with, I don't believe in any way the Flames can sign him for anything more than a ludicrous dollar figure with term.

Since we will likely be the biggest cap space and budget team out there, I would offer a long term contract to a guy like Clarkson in NJ. He is a good leader type that we would want our young guys to learn from; works hard, does all the tough little things to win. He is on the right side of 30 and fills a void on the RW.

Avatar
#36 Parallex
May 10 2013, 11:48AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@piscera.infada

I'd actually be fine giving Horton term (4-5 year range). It's not so long that he'd fall off a cliff at the end, fills an immediate and medium-term need and I'm a big fan of Horton.

Tough figuring out dollars though... what is Horton's cost/worth in the upcoming cap environment?

Avatar
#37 piscera.infada
May 10 2013, 11:49AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
T&A4Flames wrote:

Since we will likely be the biggest cap space and budget team out there, I would offer a long term contract to a guy like Clarkson in NJ. He is a good leader type that we would want our young guys to learn from; works hard, does all the tough little things to win. He is on the right side of 30 and fills a void on the RW.

I'd be a much bigger fan of Clarkson than Horton. I still think that's a real tough sell. To me, Clarkson seems like the kind of player any potential contender would want, and that's a tough contract to turn down if your Clarkson and his agent.

Aside from contenders, I could (unfortunately) see him signing with the Oil. However, I'm not too certain of their Cap situation, and too lazy to look it up. It just seems like he's the type of player they need, and again (unfortunately) they have a bigger appeal than the Flames at the moment.

Avatar
#38 piscera.infada
May 10 2013, 11:51AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Parallex

I think he can ask for what he wants - he's been there done that (as far as playoff hockey).

I guess I can agree to disagree though - I'm not a big fan of his, I think he's a tad overrated.

Avatar
#39 Kent Wilson
May 10 2013, 11:58AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I'm going to do a profile on him, but Clarkson might be the best UFA forward available this summer.

Avatar
#40 clyde
May 10 2013, 12:01PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
T&A4Flames wrote:

Timmonen with 1yr left @ $6mil and PHI 1st for Butler and PIT (or STL- whichever is the later) 1st.

Have heard something similar to this but with Mezeros being the most likely def.

Avatar
#41 SmellOfVictory
May 10 2013, 12:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Colin.S wrote:

Why in the hell would Vancouver buy out David booth when they are going to move Luongo and buy out Ballard?

*try to move Luongo. That contract is awful under the new CBA (it wasn't even very good under the old one).

Avatar
#42 T&A4Flames
May 10 2013, 12:12PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@piscera.infada

Oilers cap situation is middle of the pack with about $16-$17mil available. However, they have to sign Gagner this year and PRV if they are keeping him as well as RNH and both Schultz' next year.

I would argue EDM situation is better though. There are a lot of things that players know that we just don't ever hear about. The view of players could be that there is dissension in EDM. One good thing that Feaster has done is publicly tell people that they still want to make the PO. Sucks for the fans on the 'rebuild' side to hear, but good for any potential FA to hear. That is also why I would say a long term contract for Clarkson because he may see us as contenders in 2-3 years. We'll likely throw in a NMC for good times. Also, another good thing is how the org treats players. The way CGY handled Iggy and Jbo was class. It likely hurt the organization in possible asset acquisitions, but it will gain points amongst players and FA.

Avatar
#43 piscera.infada
May 10 2013, 12:20PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@T&A4Flames

Is that to say they wouldn't take a stab at Clarkson? I don't know. I would say he's due somewhere in the 4 million dollar range, no?

Avatar
#44 T&A4Flames
May 10 2013, 12:38PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
piscera.infada wrote:

Is that to say they wouldn't take a stab at Clarkson? I don't know. I would say he's due somewhere in the 4 million dollar range, no?

I'm sure EDM will take a run at him. That's why I would offer him full term (7yrs. and upwards of $5mil/per.). Yes, it's a large over pay, but some of those character guys that can do it all are worth it and we have the space. Over the next 3-4 years we should see a large influx of young players on ELC. Clarkson can protect them, help them grow as pros and score some points at the same time.

I would love a Clarkson- Backlund- Baertsci line.

Avatar
#45 Parallex
May 10 2013, 12:39PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
the-wolf wrote:

What's the point in acquiring Horton though? If the goal is to rebuild then Horton's best days will be long behind him by the time the Flames are really rolling. I think that salary can be better spent elsewhere.

... the point is to get a really good hockey player? What else would it be?

If F.O. statements are to be believed the Flames are trying to rebuild while remaining competative. Horton easily makes the team more competative. It's not like the Flames lack for cash or cap and there's little better out there to spend it on (I'd argue nothing better). I suppose you could go looking for older, cheaper, shorter-term options but none of them will be as good a hockey player as Horton. Since other are trumpating him, I'll also say that I wouldn't mind Clarkson either... but he's a bit older and I have no idea what he'd be looking for in either dollars or term. Regardless, if the Flames pick one of them up I'd like them to also move Tanguay.

Avatar
#46 piscera.infada
May 10 2013, 12:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@T&A4Flames

I'm with you, Clarkson would be an unreal pick-up. Even with a modest overpay. If not just to keep him out of Edmonton (that would be terrifying).

Avatar
#47 Sincity1976
May 10 2013, 01:11PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Parallex wrote:

Two or three years won't get it done, this is going to be Horton's only prime years UFA contract so he's got to make it count (he's also the best forward on the free agent market this year, pre-buyouts, so he'll have no shortage of people offering him more term then that).

Then you don't sign a deal. But I don't agree. Horton's declining production and injury risk may mean that no team is willing to give him a long term contract.

Avatar
#48 T&A4Flames
May 10 2013, 01:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Sincity1976 wrote:

Then you don't sign a deal. But I don't agree. Horton's declining production and injury risk may mean that no team is willing to give him a long term contract.

I wonder, with the dropping cap and possible concerns over his health, would the Horton camp be interested in signing a big 1 or 2yr contract to prove he feels good. He'd still be 29 at the end and could sign a much more lucrative contract then. Very risky, though, for him.

Avatar
#49 Kevin R
May 10 2013, 01:41PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I want Feaster to be that dirty hooker on 4th ave holding a sign saying "will do anything for a 1st rounder".

Some scenarios:

To Calgary-Heatley(1 year left 7.5mill) & Minny's 1st for Tanguay

To Wash: Butler & our Pitt 1st round pick for Alzner

To Tampa: Butler, Granlund, Stl 1st, 2014 2nd for Ohlund(cap hit 3.6 for 3 more years) & 2013 1st

To Philly: Pitt 1st, Butler for Mezaros & the 2013 1st

To Philly: Our 1st 6th overall,Butler, Tanguay(they need left wingers) for Bryz & Couturier & their 1st 12th overall

To Chic: Butler(wanna get rid of him), our 3rd rounder for Olesz(3.1 dump for next year) & their 1st

Something along those lines:)

Avatar
#50 Kurt
May 10 2013, 01:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Honest question... When was the last time a UFA went to a lottery team? And I don't mean the leftover UFAs still hunting for work in August.

My gut tells me never, but there may be examples that say otherwise, I'm just not sure.

Personally I think we'd have to overpay X2 to get any UFA to come here, and I fail to see the point at this point. You get UFAs when you are ready to take the next step, not when you are at ground zero of a rebuild or retool or whatever you want to call it. Any UFA you get now will be declining in 2-3 years when our kids are starting to mature. Its pointless...

But the bottom line is that I think its wishful thinking bordering on lunacy to think any good player with teams fighting for his services will choose to come here. I'd be happy to be proven wrong by historical examples.

Comments are closed for this article.