Stajan Extended, Hartley Fined

Ryan Pike
January 21 2014 10:59AM


(courtesy uiowa.edu)

A bit of news coming down yesterday that merits some attention.

The Flames signed centre Matt Stajan to a four-year contract extension worth an AAV of $3.125 million per year. The NHL also announced that Flames coach Bob Hartley was fined $25,000 for the shenanigans on Saturday night. (He got off light, as John Tortorella was banished from the NHL for 15 days/6 games.)

Let's deal with these one at a time.

THE FINE

First, the fine. Hartley trotted out an interesting starting five or the Vancouver game - Brian McGrattan, Kevin Westgarth, Blair Jones, Ladislav Smid and Chris Butler. Then insanity went down. The NHL's basis for the fine was by-law 17.3(a), dealing with conduct detrimental to the league. Specifically, the league's stance is Kevin Westgarth was acting like a fool - trying to engage an unwilling combatant in Kevin Bieska - and Hartley was responsible for his actions by putting him out there in that situation. Under the NHL's by-laws, the league can fine just about anyone for any reason.

Were they justified here? 

Yes. They probably were.

THE EXTENSION

Matt Stajan is now signed until the end of the 2017-18 season. His cap hit is $3.125 million, placing him behind Jiri Hudler, David Jones, Dennis Wideman, Mark Giordano and Ladislav Smid in cap hits among players signed for next year. He's ahead of Karri Ramo and Curtis Glencross. But what's his value?

Calgary has four "regular centres" - Stajan, Mikael Backlund, Sean Monahan and Joe Colborne. Let's compare them.

  • Scoring goals: Stajan has 7 goals, just behind Backlund (8) and well behind Monahan (13).
  • Generating points: Again, Stajan's 17 points is behind Backlund and Monahan, tied with 19.
  • Winning face-offs: Stajan wins 48.5% of draws, which isn't great, but he's a giant on a team with a group average of 46.0%. He leads the team, especially Backlund (46.5) and Monahan (45). Colborne is at 48%, but takes much fewer face-offs.
  • Tough sledding: Stajan's second amongst centers in PK time (behind Backlund). His Relative Corsi is 3.8, second among centres behind Backlund (11.5) and ahead of Colborne (1.6) and Monahan (-7.1). Adjusting for quality of competition - Stajan faces the second-toughest sledding among centres behind Backlund in an effort to shield the younger kids - we have a Relative Corsi QoC that's, again, better than everyone but Backlund. And Stajan has the lowest offensive zone starts percentage on the team.

So Bob Hartley constantly tosses Stajan out there in the defensive zone, either at even-strength or on the PK, against the second lines of every team. And Stajan produces decently well, drives play to a good extent, and, more impressively, wins face-offs more consistently than any other Flame. (Side-bar: more impressive is Backund driving play against top lines, but I digress.) He also gives you a leadership element in the room that can't be undervalued or overlooked, but is also extremely difficult to quantify or measure.

In terms of cap hit, I can get it. Stajan gives you something right now that other guys don't give you. But the key there is "right now."

Backlund is an NHL centre. Colborne is a project. Monahan's a rookie, but has showed some promise. In 2014-15, your top two centres are probably Backlund and Stajan. That's fine, as they can effectively shield Monahan. But who else is coming in? Corban Knight and Bill Arnold may be here next season, but both would probably welcome the Monahan shielding, at least to start. Beyond next year, though, the hope is that Sean Monahan finds his sea legs like Backlund did and needs less shielding and favourable match-ups - you can give those to Arnold and/or Knight.

By year 2 or 3 of Stajan's extension, you probably hit a bit of a crunch in terms of ice-time and situations you can put players into, and that's presuming Stajan doesn't start regressing over time. The four-year term is a bit odd. A two-year deal would've been perfect for the Flames, but I reckon the Stajan camp wanted a bit more security, so four years became the figure.

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 SeanCharles
January 21 2014, 11:15AM
Trash it!
36
trashes
Props
12
props

I wonder if you will get trashed as much as I did yesterday for saying the contract was 1-2 years too long..?

Avatar
#2 Dave
January 21 2014, 11:17AM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
30
props

I like everything about the contract. It forces the young players to compete for a spot rather than plugging them into holes.

Avatar
#3 MWflames
January 21 2014, 11:19AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
22
props

I'm sure for the longest time almost every flames fan could not wait for the time that stajan's contract was done. Interesting how times change and here we are with the Flames handing him a four year extension.

I have to say though, I would have been very surprised if they traded Stajan. As was noted in the article, the Flames need a guy like Stajan for the next year or two at least. Calgary's chances at decent UFA's this year are a long shot. And if nothing else, he works hard and is apparently decent in the locker room.

The term is probably one year longer than I was hoping for, but the AAV is a good deal. At the end of year 2, I suspect this contract is very movable to a team needing a reliable depth center. We might not get a huge return exactly, but I believe he will be movable when the time is right.

If Stajan isn't signed, the Flames would effectively be relying on Monahan playing 2nd line next year assuming Backlund is healthy all year. That's not fair to either player, and would resemble similar burn it to the ground rebuilds that have been going on somewhere else in Alberta.

The real kicker will be whether or not there is a NTC or NMC. Have the details been released yet??

Avatar
#4 SeanCharles
January 21 2014, 11:29AM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
0
props

@MWflames

I heard this morning on the Fan they were saying he had a modified NTC like last time...

Meaning he can likely name 10 teams he doesn't want to be traded to.

Avatar
#5 piscera.infada
January 21 2014, 11:32AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
4
props

@SeanCharles

I would agree with you - it is 1-2 years too long, I tend towards 1 year. That said, with the sad state of affairs this team is going to be in, adding an extra year to ensure the stability of someone who the organization knows isn't too big a deal. If younger players prove they're ready at any amount of time throughout Stajan's contract, the organization knows he'll be willing to move down the depth chart accordingly.

@MWflames

As I understand, team's generally don't release that kind of information. Pinder tried to get it from the Flames, and they told him they don't release contract clauses. I would assume, if anything, there's a modified NTC, probably with a short list of teams he wont go to (around five seems to be average for these type of deals) - pure speculation though.

Avatar
#6 Parallex
January 21 2014, 11:38AM
Trash it!
26
trashes
Props
8
props

That crunch happens immediately.

Backlund, Stajan, Monahan, Colborne... I don't think you want any of those guys languishing on your fourth line babysitting goons. Hopefully Colborne just stays on Monahan's wing for now. But what happens when the next guy is ready?... whatever it is it won't be optimal.

I really really dislike the term on Stajan's deal. If it were two years I'd be cool wih it but 4 years effectively makes it near unmoveable.

Avatar
#7 Joel
January 21 2014, 11:59AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
11
props

NHL bylaw 17.3(a)

Otherwise known as "if ESPN mentions hockey, it damn well better be for a highlight goal, otherwise someone is being fined" rule

Avatar
#8 Lordmork
January 21 2014, 12:02PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
32
props

I have to think that in 1-2 years, when one and hopefully more of Monahan, Colborne, Arnold, Knight or someone else are ready to take Stajan's minutes, his contract will be tradable. Nobody will break the bank to acquire him, but 2 years of a $3~ million centreman who can take difficult minutes against a cap of 71 million seems like it might have some value.

Personally, I like the idea that in order to take his spot/minutes, the team's prospective centres have to outplay Stajan. If someone does emerge who can play better than him, then that's a nice problem to have.

Avatar
#9 wot96
January 21 2014, 12:13PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
19
props

This means that Backlund looks like a heck of a deal at $1.5M per through next season.

The Stajan signing appears to set the Flames up reasonably well for Backlund's re-signing too. By setting the bar they way they have, the Flames can either pay him what he is really worth (one way or another) or if he keeps progressing and another team signs him to a offer sheet, the Flames should get some pretty good compensation back in return.

I'd rather the Flames kept him if he progresses but at least by then there should be more options, including some players currently in Abby that may well turn out.

Avatar
#10 Parallex
January 21 2014, 12:30PM
Trash it!
28
trashes
Props
4
props
Lordmork wrote:

I have to think that in 1-2 years, when one and hopefully more of Monahan, Colborne, Arnold, Knight or someone else are ready to take Stajan's minutes, his contract will be tradable. Nobody will break the bank to acquire him, but 2 years of a $3~ million centreman who can take difficult minutes against a cap of 71 million seems like it might have some value.

Personally, I like the idea that in order to take his spot/minutes, the team's prospective centres have to outplay Stajan. If someone does emerge who can play better than him, then that's a nice problem to have.

Why do you have to think that?

1-2 years... so you think that someone is going to want Stajan in 1 year when he has 3.5 years left at 3.125M? I don't, nor do I think he'll be anymore attractive with 2.5 years remaining.

So then let's fast forward another year to the point that I think it could be moveable 1.5 years left... at that point we'll be talking about a 33ish y.o. Stajan and who knows what his skill level will be like at that point? Sure he can take difficult minutes now... but it's not like the team comes out ahead during those minutes. He's currently on the wrong side of thirty and I don't think you can count on Stajan to buck the standard aging curve of a professional athlete.

Avatar
#11 Sincity1976
January 21 2014, 12:30PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
41
props

You don't need to love Stajan, Jones, Smid, O'Brien, etc. They are fillers that allow the coaches to shelter the kids. You need these guys. As a rebuilding team these players are either unavailable or very expensive in free agency. Or you have to go out and spend assets to trade for them.

I would rather have Stajan, a well liked and hard working player for the Flames, at 3.1 million than spending too much money on a free agent or assets on a trade.

The popular answer is to fill his spot with the kids. But throwing the kids in over their head isn't the answer.

Avatar
#12 BJ
January 21 2014, 12:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
6
props

@MWflames

Agree... we could use a guy like Staje going forward... plus his trade value is somewhat poor... better to move assets that will net a better return...

Term is only one year too long... all in all a prudent move

Avatar
#13 Rockmorton65
January 21 2014, 12:41PM
Trash it!
25
trashes
Props
4
props

I can see Backlund being moved. I think the door has closed on him becoming a 1C. He's great defensively, but seems to have peaked offensively. I suspect he'll be moved after free agency, should Calgary have the opportunity to sign Stastny.

Side note - I was shocked the other night when they showed Backlund has never scored on the shoot out. He's only ever had 3 opportunities. Wild.

Avatar
#14 redricardo
January 21 2014, 12:49PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
37
props

Can anyone else picture Hartley being a smart ass, and emailing Bettman his starting lineups for the next few games for pre-approval.

"Hey Commish, these guys scored for me last game, and they're NHL players, so I was thinking of starting them. Is that okay with you, or are you gonna fine me again?"

Avatar
#15 SmellOfVictory
January 21 2014, 12:57PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
16
props
Rockmorton65 wrote:

I can see Backlund being moved. I think the door has closed on him becoming a 1C. He's great defensively, but seems to have peaked offensively. I suspect he'll be moved after free agency, should Calgary have the opportunity to sign Stastny.

Side note - I was shocked the other night when they showed Backlund has never scored on the shoot out. He's only ever had 3 opportunities. Wild.

He's not expected to be 1C at this point (I don't think anyone has really expected that for a couple of years). But he's still the best centre on the Flames, and one of their best forwards, period. Given a choice between him and Stajan, I take Backlund 100% of the time. That said, I'd rather they keep both, at least for the near future.

Avatar
#16 Christian Roatis
January 21 2014, 01:08PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
7
props

Damn it ESPN, if it weren't for you Bettman would've never seen it!

Avatar
#17 druds
January 21 2014, 01:13PM
Trash it!
23
trashes
Props
5
props

The brawl had nothing to do with Hartley, it has the GM's fingerprints all over it...I think Burke should be paying this fine

Avatar
#18 MichaelD
January 21 2014, 01:44PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
23
props

Again like most I would have liked to see 2 or 3 years for Stajan, but I feel like something that is overlooked is loyalty. It's been mentioned that Stajan probably asked for stability, and if there's a guy who is still a fairly effective veteran, who wears a letter, and wants to stay four more years with a rebuilding team. You accommodate him.

Nothing wrong with this signing; Maintains a healthy relationship between management and players, and creates competition for younger players.

Avatar
#19 Chad
January 21 2014, 02:09PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
14
props
Rockmorton65 wrote:

I can see Backlund being moved. I think the door has closed on him becoming a 1C. He's great defensively, but seems to have peaked offensively. I suspect he'll be moved after free agency, should Calgary have the opportunity to sign Stastny.

Side note - I was shocked the other night when they showed Backlund has never scored on the shoot out. He's only ever had 3 opportunities. Wild.

Backlund is not a 1C he doesn't have the offense. He is either a puck possession/defensive responsible 2C playing between a play maker and a sniper or a 3C that can legitimately play against other team top lines see the Penguins game where Sid got shut down.

It is a very useful piece but because Backlund doesn't play in a visually flashy/gritty way by either stapling people to the board or sliding around to block shots people don't realize the puck possession Backlund generates. Getting rid of Backlund would be a mistake. He is both better and younger than Stajan and can just fit more roles through out the line up.

Avatar
#20 loudogYYC
January 21 2014, 02:13PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
9
props
druds wrote:

The brawl had nothing to do with Hartley, it has the GM's fingerprints all over it...I think Burke should be paying this fine

So that means we can just ignore Hartley's history of deploying goons on every team he's coached? ok.

Regarding Stajan, I thought 3 years was ideal, but 4 isn't terrible and like @Lordmork said, it forces our up and coming Centres to outperform an established, albeit not amazing centre who'll be sheltering them while they work their way up. Ultimately there will be a logjam at Centre, but I'd argue that's one of the best problems to have in the NHL.

Avatar
#21 mattyc
January 21 2014, 02:23PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
11
props

@Parallex

right now we have a center depth chart of Backlund, Stajan, Monahan, (arguably with Colborne as #4, or maybe as a winger). Until someone comes up and makes Stajan redundant, we need his skills.

Realistically, centers coming up that will be knocking on the door will be Colborne, or Knight, or perhaps we draft a center this summer. Either way, IMO it's unlikely that anyone it going to make Stajan redundant in the next year or 2. If they do, great, you can bury Stajan on the depth chart again, and reduce his minutes. But you don't build a team hoping that an unproven player can exceed expectations.

Avatar
#22 Anar Saju
January 21 2014, 02:38PM
Trash it!
9
trashes
Props
4
props

Compliments to Matt Stajan for his extension. A well deserving honor, for sure.

Subsequently, I truly disagree with the fine issued to Bob Hartley...at least he was not the one barging into the opposition's dressing room only to be kicked out.

In closing, it had been disturbing to watch the initial few minutes of the game; and whatever ensued; because hockey is a professional sport. Players, coaches and the organization at large have to maintain their integrity and professionalism. These are the criteria that make the sport fun to watch - the challenges and competence not the aggression and unsportsman like character.

Avatar
#23 Primo
January 21 2014, 03:21PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
11
props

To all the posts that think the contract is a year too long broaden your line of thinking and include negotiations 101 in your thought process...

Stagan camp says---3 years @ $10.5M ($3.5M cap hit) or we walk to free agency.

Burkie says---4 years @ $12.5 ($3.1 cap hit)

You have a deal for a solid 3rd line centre who wants to be here and will mentor your young talent for 4 years!!

ps..solid good 2 way centres are difficult to find!

Avatar
#24 Parallex
January 21 2014, 04:18PM
Trash it!
12
trashes
Props
1
props
mattyc wrote:

right now we have a center depth chart of Backlund, Stajan, Monahan, (arguably with Colborne as #4, or maybe as a winger). Until someone comes up and makes Stajan redundant, we need his skills.

Realistically, centers coming up that will be knocking on the door will be Colborne, or Knight, or perhaps we draft a center this summer. Either way, IMO it's unlikely that anyone it going to make Stajan redundant in the next year or 2. If they do, great, you can bury Stajan on the depth chart again, and reduce his minutes. But you don't build a team hoping that an unproven player can exceed expectations.

It's not year 1 & 2 that I dislike it's years 3 & 4. You say that until someone comes up and makes Stajan redundant we need his skills... ok, we may need the skills but I don't think they need to come from Stajan and I don't think they need to be 4 years long at 3M per. I think Burke is over-committing to an asset that could have been replaced in the offseason and potentially delivered something at the deadline.

That and I don't trust the Burketatorship to not think that Stajan's lack of facepunchery excludes him from play on the fourth line when folk usurp his spot/s.

Avatar
#25 Parallex
January 21 2014, 04:21PM
Trash it!
11
trashes
Props
0
props
Primo wrote:

To all the posts that think the contract is a year too long broaden your line of thinking and include negotiations 101 in your thought process...

Stagan camp says---3 years @ $10.5M ($3.5M cap hit) or we walk to free agency.

Burkie says---4 years @ $12.5 ($3.1 cap hit)

You have a deal for a solid 3rd line centre who wants to be here and will mentor your young talent for 4 years!!

ps..solid good 2 way centres are difficult to find!

I would taken the hypothetical Stajan camp deal over the Burke deal (if I were the Burke camp)... easily.

Avatar
#26 Primo
January 21 2014, 04:56PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
10
props

@Parallex

Tell me why?

You save $1.6M overall. Also your cap hit is reduced $400K per year almost enabling you to sign an additional Bouma/Street type per year.

Also $3.1M per year for Stajan is cheap cheap....

Avatar
#27 loudogYYC
January 21 2014, 05:01PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
18
props

@Primo

The logic is clear, mostly I think we're saying 3 would've been ideal.

Here's the list of potential UFA 2 way centres, their age and their current salary:

Stastny 28 $6.6M

Legwand 33 $4.5M

Roy 30 $4.0M

Bolland 27 $3.375M

Grabovski 29 $3.0M

Ott 31 $2.95M

Boyle 29 $1.7M

I doubt the Flames would be in the top 5 teams that any of these guys would want to sign with, so Stajan at $3.125/year is just fine.

Avatar
#28 Primo
January 21 2014, 05:08PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
9
props

@loudogYYC

Hey..nice review! Thx

I don't think any player wants to take a pay cut especially when your 30 years old, still productive and an overall contributor to the team.

Although Burke wanted to retain Stajan I don't think Burke wanted to pay him his current salary so in exchange for the additional year Burke gets his way with $3.125. Everyone is happy except a few fans but then it's the team that puts out the dough and takes the risk.

Avatar
#29 suba steve
January 21 2014, 05:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
22
props

How many (good) 30 year old NHL vets are looking for 2 year deals? NONE.

Bottom line is that in negotiating, there is always give and take and in the end the player often gives on $/yr and teams often give on term. Get over it. Stajan is a Flame for the foreseeable future and we should be glad to have him.

Avatar
#30 piscera.infada
January 21 2014, 05:27PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
12
props

@Primo @loudogYYC @suba steve

Exactly! No way you get Bolland, Grabovski, Roy, Statsny, or Boyle to sign for two years at less than, or equal to, what they're currently making. And oh wait, you have to play on a horrible team at the start of a rebuild, in a relatively medium-sized Canadian city. Where do they sign up?

Avatar
#31 Baalzamon
January 21 2014, 05:44PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
16
props

Yeah. I don't mind the deal.

Four years is a bit long, but ultimately? I don't think it makes much of a difference.

Stajan is worth more to the team in the lineup than he is in a trade.

Avatar
#32 mattyc
January 21 2014, 06:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
4
props

@Parallex

yeah... I disagree that he would be replaced so easily... I also don't think he would have been worth much. But obviously I'm not in the room so I can't definitively say.

Avatar
#33 exsanguinator
January 21 2014, 06:57PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
9
props

I've always liked Stajan as a Flame so I may come off as a bit biased but he deserves the contract and I like having him around to help the younger centers (Monahan, Backlund) that are on the team and that will be coming to the team in the near future (Knight, Arnold).

I see a lot of posts around here that say sell everything at the trade deadline and I disagree. That gets you the Oilers at the pace the Flames are going at. You need guys like Stajan, Hudler, and Stempniak around to show the kids how to play in the NHL. Cammaleri is the prize pig from the Flames this year.

The top 4 on D are middling but at least they are all NHLers. I see that the forward units need some seasoning but they, for the most part, are a pretty good group as well. Both of the Flames goaltenders are in their first full seasons on NHL ice. Take it slow and see how they do next year. After that, maybe start making drastic changes. You need guys like Stajan around to help them.

After the Iginla trade last year Stajan stepped into a noticeable leadership role and I feel that's part of the reason why he wears a letter and got this extension. In the long run, in years 3 or 4 if he doesn't add anything to the team the Flames can always move him for draft picks.

Avatar
#34 44stampede
January 21 2014, 07:40PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
1
props

I know that people's perception of Stajan has changed almost 180 degrees but I am curious to know if his play has.

Is there a big difference in how he was playing 3-4 years ago vs this year and last?

Almost everyone was screaming for him to get dumped for nothing or bought out if IIRC.

Avatar
#35 exsanguinator
January 21 2014, 07:50PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
8
props
44stampede wrote:

I know that people's perception of Stajan has changed almost 180 degrees but I am curious to know if his play has.

Is there a big difference in how he was playing 3-4 years ago vs this year and last?

Almost everyone was screaming for him to get dumped for nothing or bought out if IIRC.

This is from memory but when he first got here he played really well, then he spent 3 seasons in Butter's doghouse. Now under Hartley he wears an A.

I would tend to look at that as him being a victim of circumstance but without actually looking at his underlying numbers I can't say for certain.

I think that his performance is close to what he was doing on a bad team in Toronto, I might even say that he has been getting the Horcoff treatment, but so far over the past 2 seasons he's been doing well.

He's shooting at near career percentage while taking the worst zone starts of any center on the team and if you look at his PDO it looks like he's being sunk by bad goaltending.

Is he worth 3.15 million a year? There's some debate there but he's definitely a valuable low cost asset for the Flames. Keep in mind that 3.15 is a paycut for him. That speaks volumes about his character and what he does in the room. The fact that he can actually play decent 2-way hockey is a huge bonus.

Avatar
#36 Kypreos
January 21 2014, 08:26PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
7
props

Everyone should be going online and voting John Gaudreau every 24 hrs....

http://www.hobeybaker.com/awards/the-hobey-baker-memorial-award/vote

Avatar
#37 Burnward
January 21 2014, 08:30PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
7
props

I think it's important to remember when we look at this team the impact injuries have had on them.

The defensive corps is now healthy, finally. And they looked pretty darn solid against San Jose last night.

With GlenX and Cammi back up front, the boys can usually push most teams in the league.

There's a reason they have been in so many one goal games. They are good enough to skate with them, but are maybe a player or two away from winning more of those games.

The base is here. If we can find one or two more scorers and a legit goaltender...I think next year could be a huge rebound.

Or not. I tend to look at things in a positive light.

Avatar
#38 Baalzamon
January 21 2014, 08:30PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
4
props
Kypreos wrote:

Everyone should be going online and voting John Gaudreau every 24 hrs....

http://www.hobeybaker.com/awards/the-hobey-baker-memorial-award/vote

Lol I was literally just about to post this.

Come on, gents. The gap is closing, but Johnny still needs our help. We realize this is only the first round of votes, but Gaudreau should never, ever be second place to that damn dirty ape (Canuck) Ben Hutton.

Avatar
#39 exsanguinator
January 21 2014, 08:35PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
3
props
Burnward wrote:

I think it's important to remember when we look at this team the impact injuries have had on them.

The defensive corps is now healthy, finally. And they looked pretty darn solid against San Jose last night.

With GlenX and Cammi back up front, the boys can usually push most teams in the league.

There's a reason they have been in so many one goal games. They are good enough to skate with them, but are maybe a player or two away from winning more of those games.

The base is here. If we can find one or two more scorers and a legit goaltender...I think next year could be a huge rebound.

Or not. I tend to look at things in a positive light.

I definitely agree with you. Hopefully this can be a Ottawa style retool rather a walk through the desert but I definitely don't think it's going to play out that way.

Avatar
#40 Burnward
January 21 2014, 08:53PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
7
props

@Kypreos

Should get the guys at 960 pushing this! Do a Johnny Hockey Week...get all Flames fans to vote for him and push him to the top.

That should silence the talk about him signing elsewhere if we get him the Hobey Baker! Ha!

Avatar
#41 Where.is.ville?
January 21 2014, 09:07PM
Trash it!
22
trashes
Props
1
props

Let's be clear. Signing Stajan to 4 years is an act of desperation - rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. He has turned into a dependable player, but time is not on his side! Two years would have been better! Look at the big skilled centres in the West! No comparison. The Flames need a BIG trade now.

Avatar
#42 Where.is.ville?
January 21 2014, 09:11PM
Trash it!
17
trashes
Props
3
props

Johnny Gaudreau has an escape clause - he is small and will never play for the Flames!!!!

Avatar
#43 Kypreos
January 21 2014, 09:30PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
5
props
Burnward wrote:

Should get the guys at 960 pushing this! Do a Johnny Hockey Week...get all Flames fans to vote for him and push him to the top.

That should silence the talk about him signing elsewhere if we get him the Hobey Baker! Ha!

I agree 100 percent.

Where is Steinberg when you need him?

Avatar
#44 Parallex
January 21 2014, 10:35PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
6
props
Primo wrote:

Tell me why?

You save $1.6M overall. Also your cap hit is reduced $400K per year almost enabling you to sign an additional Bouma/Street type per year.

Also $3.1M per year for Stajan is cheap cheap....

The reason I'd prefer 3.5 for three over 3.1 for four is because none of the positives in the 4 year scenario matter. The Flames need to spend just to meet the cap floor so saving 400K per year in cap space is functionally of no benefit (we won't be up against the cap). Meanwhile Matt Stajan is "post-apex" he has diminishing value as an athletic asset and therefor the fourth year will be the year where you're getting the least absolute value. He's also not starting from a high position... he's the third center on the third worst team in the league so it's not like he's going to diminish to a still high standard.

I don't really object to the money, I'm fine with the AVV just not when it accompanies that term.

Avatar
#45 Parallex
January 21 2014, 10:37PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
6
props
Burnward wrote:

Should get the guys at 960 pushing this! Do a Johnny Hockey Week...get all Flames fans to vote for him and push him to the top.

That should silence the talk about him signing elsewhere if we get him the Hobey Baker! Ha!

... you guys know that contest doesn't actually decide who get's the Hobey right? IIRC It accounts for 1% of the award determination. I'd be shocked if Gaudreau doesn't get it... senoir bias would have to be huge to ignore the epicness of his junior year.

Avatar
#46 suba steve
January 21 2014, 10:40PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
1
props
Parallex wrote:

The reason I'd prefer 3.5 for three over 3.1 for four is because none of the positives in the 4 year scenario matter. The Flames need to spend just to meet the cap floor so saving 400K per year in cap space is functionally of no benefit (we won't be up against the cap). Meanwhile Matt Stajan is "post-apex" he has diminishing value as an athletic asset and therefor the fourth year will be the year where you're getting the least absolute value. He's also not starting from a high position... he's the third center on the third worst team in the league so it's not like he's going to diminish to a still high standard.

I don't really object to the money, I'm fine with the AVV just not when it accompanies that term.

You negotiate the next contract then Parallex. You should have the whole mess cleaned up in short order.

Oh, and remind me again, which teams out there are following that no "post-apex player" model you are advocating?

Avatar
#47 Burnward
January 21 2014, 10:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

@Parallex

I am aware. It would be a cool thing though.

Avatar
#48 theartfuldodger
January 21 2014, 10:53PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
1
props
Kypreos wrote:

Everyone should be going online and voting John Gaudreau every 24 hrs....

http://www.hobeybaker.com/awards/the-hobey-baker-memorial-award/vote

I sent a text to 960...

Avatar
#49 theartfuldodger
January 21 2014, 10:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Where.is.ville? wrote:

Johnny Gaudreau has an escape clause - he is small and will never play for the Flames!!!!

Please explain the escape clause?

Avatar
#50 Burnward
January 21 2014, 10:59PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
1
props

@theartfuldodger

It's basically what Justin Schultz did to the Ducks. It's an option for all college players.

Comments are closed for this article.