Flames put Nicklas Grossmann on waivers

Christian Roatis
November 08 2016 10:30AM

Finally. 

The weird, inexplainable, unfathomable, physically painful Nicklas Grossmann era in Calgary appears to be over, with the #big defenceman going on waivers today, destined for what we can only assume is the AHL.

Grossmann played three games in Flames silks, managing not to be a glaring hole in one of them. His first and third games - in Edmonton and Los Angeles respectively - were absolute horror shows, with miscues and errors in abundance. I realize this evaluation of his time in Calgary his harsh, but the guy just didn't look like a National Hockey League defenceman, and opponents simply feasted on this fact. I'm sure he's a very nice guy and good in the room but the Flames have plenty of actual good hockey players who are also good in the room. This is professional hockey. 

Grossmann playing three actual games for the Flames still puzzles me, however. Glen Gulutzan had him during his heyday in Dallas, so the games he received as a Flame were either a show of loyalty on the coach's part, or maybe were built into his contract. 

To elaborate on that point, when Grossmann signed with the Flames, General Manager Brad Treliving detailed the thought process behind the signing and the salary cap/LTIR implications that go along with it. He also said in an interview on Sportsnet 960 the day of the signing that he didn't expect Grossmann to stick around in Calgary all year. So, if Grossmann playing wasn't the coach's decision, maybe it was built into Grossmann's contract as incentive for taking that very specific amount of money that the Flames needed to satisfy the LTIR requirements. 

If this is indeed Nicklas Grossmann's last game in a Flame, he would finish as a minus four in thee games played, with three shots and two penalty minutes. 

Onwards and upwards. 

20eba9f84d9905f9b859288e29c3e0a8
Christian Roatis writes about the Calgary Flames at FlamesNation and covers the NHL Entry Draft for FutureConsiderations. Follow him on Twitter @CRoatis!
Avatar
#1 brodiegio4life
November 08 2016, 10:34AM
Trash it!
10
trashes
Props
48
props

treliving figured the only way to stop gulutzan from continually playing him for no reason was to put him on waivers

Avatar
#2 JoelOttosJock
November 08 2016, 10:36AM
Trash it!
126
trashes
Props
8
props

About time..Hopefully Matt Pylon Stajan and Dennis LinesKiller Wideman are next followed by GG

Avatar
#3 Captain Ron
November 08 2016, 10:37AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
67
props

Should never have been here to begin with. There were much better options.

Avatar
#4 everton fc
November 08 2016, 10:39AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
34
props

So he plays his last year in North American out of Stockton.

Could be worse, for all parties...

Now we go w/7 d-men. Sanity prevails. Kulak needs to start every game, if this rumour of his playing more than 40-odd games makes him eligible for the Expansion Draft, if left "unprotected".

Something's gotta give on the backend - how can they leave Kulak unprotected? He's arguably been our most consistent defenceman.

Avatar
#5 FlamesFanOtherCity
November 08 2016, 10:42AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
99
props
JoelOttosJock wrote:

About time..Hopefully Matt Pylon Stajan and Dennis LinesKiller Wideman are next followed by GG

Stajan may have hands of stone at times, but he is our current faceoff leader. Say what you want about the contract, but he's one of the players actually performing out there, and that's with very little to no O-zone starts.

Avatar
#6 everton fc
November 08 2016, 10:46AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
57
props
FlamesFanOtherCity wrote:

Stajan may have hands of stone at times, but he is our current faceoff leader. Say what you want about the contract, but he's one of the players actually performing out there, and that's with very little to no O-zone starts.

Stajan has been one of the most consistent players, based on his role. He's helped Ferland's game, as well. Good mentor. One more year here can't hurt us, and will undoubtedly help a few of the kids.

Just like Engelland's influence on Kulak.

Waive Wideman. Retain salary. See if anyone bites. Bring up one of the kids. Wotherspoon? What do we have to lose??

Avatar
#7 Pizzaman
November 08 2016, 11:02AM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
29
props

So aren't reporters supposed to ask questions of coaches or GMs as to why???? Or are they just cheerleaders. Nice to speculate on a blog but do we have to wait for Elliotte Friedman to find out?

Avatar
#8 Greatsave
November 08 2016, 11:16AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
10
props

@everton fc

this rumour of his playing more than 40-odd games makes him eligible for the Expansion Draft

I have no idea how this got started. By all accounts Kulak was always going to be eligible and required protection in the Expansion Draft, even if he spent the year in the AHL. If he reached 40 games this season, then leaving him exposed counts him towards exposure requirements. That's all.

Avatar
#9 jupiter
November 08 2016, 11:18AM
Trash it!
8
trashes
Props
17
props
Pizzaman wrote:

So aren't reporters supposed to ask questions of coaches or GMs as to why???? Or are they just cheerleaders. Nice to speculate on a blog but do we have to wait for Elliotte Friedman to find out?

If you were BT you'd be ducking the press right now as well.

Avatar
#10 knappsacked
November 08 2016, 11:21AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
37
props

No need for people to call for stajans head. If he is here next year its not the end of the world. Jankowski will replace him. Stajan could be a 13th forward next yeard if/when janko is ready

Avatar
#11 snotss
November 08 2016, 11:30AM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
18
props

poor pick up bt..never should have been signed...your answers are down in stockton

Avatar
#12 Flint
November 08 2016, 11:33AM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
11
props

My theory is still that they were trying to get Grossman 12 games to fulfill base requirements for the expansion draft - thinking he couldn't be so bad, and they could pick the games to hide him in. That and he brought along with him a (small) the LTIR contract benefit.

However, when they saw he was a total tire fire on an underperforming team, coupled with Kulaks great play, they've decided to fulfill the requirement with Kulak. Give him the games all the while being the better team for it.

Avatar
#13 brodiegio4life
November 08 2016, 11:42AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
30
props
Flint wrote:

My theory is still that they were trying to get Grossman 12 games to fulfill base requirements for the expansion draft - thinking he couldn't be so bad, and they could pick the games to hide him in. That and he brought along with him a (small) the LTIR contract benefit.

However, when they saw he was a total tire fire on an underperforming team, coupled with Kulaks great play, they've decided to fulfill the requirement with Kulak. Give him the games all the while being the better team for it.

they could pick the games to hide him? They played him against mcdavid, st.louis, and the Kings... not exactly hiding him

Avatar
#14 supra steve
November 08 2016, 11:56AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
14
props
Flint wrote:

My theory is still that they were trying to get Grossman 12 games to fulfill base requirements for the expansion draft - thinking he couldn't be so bad, and they could pick the games to hide him in. That and he brought along with him a (small) the LTIR contract benefit.

However, when they saw he was a total tire fire on an underperforming team, coupled with Kulaks great play, they've decided to fulfill the requirement with Kulak. Give him the games all the while being the better team for it.

"My theory is still that they were trying to get Grossman 12 games to fulfill base requirements for the expansion draft"

So how does this work exactly? My understanding is they can protect 3 (Gio, Brodie, Hamilton), that leaves Kevin and Kulak available for selection as well as Grossmann if your theory is correct...Who would you select?

Unless they are able to move both Kulak and Kevin for picks/prospects, having Grossmann gains them nothing. If I'm missing something, please let me know what.

Avatar
#15 ianberg1
November 08 2016, 11:57AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
20
props

Only surprised that it took this long to waive Grossmann

Avatar
#16 redhot1
November 08 2016, 11:57AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
5
props
everton fc wrote:

So he plays his last year in North American out of Stockton.

Could be worse, for all parties...

Now we go w/7 d-men. Sanity prevails. Kulak needs to start every game, if this rumour of his playing more than 40-odd games makes him eligible for the Expansion Draft, if left "unprotected".

Something's gotta give on the backend - how can they leave Kulak unprotected? He's arguably been our most consistent defenceman.

So if he plays 40 games he's then eligibe to be picked off? Why would you want him starting every game?

Not that I disagree, he's been awesome.

Avatar
#17 flamesburn89
November 08 2016, 12:04PM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
9
props

Thank the Lord

Avatar
#18 jupiter
November 08 2016, 12:05PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
27
props
Flint wrote:

My theory is still that they were trying to get Grossman 12 games to fulfill base requirements for the expansion draft - thinking he couldn't be so bad, and they could pick the games to hide him in. That and he brought along with him a (small) the LTIR contract benefit.

However, when they saw he was a total tire fire on an underperforming team, coupled with Kulaks great play, they've decided to fulfill the requirement with Kulak. Give him the games all the while being the better team for it.

How is it that many fans knew Grossman would be a tire fire , and Cameron would be a tire fire on special teams and that GG was a gamble, but BT didn't?

Avatar
#19 Hubcap1
November 08 2016, 12:26PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
22
props

It always seemed clear me that Grossman was here for cap reasons, but why he actually played in games is beyond me.

Avatar
#20 Derzie
November 08 2016, 12:50PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
20
props
jupiter wrote:

How is it that many fans knew Grossman would be a tire fire , and Cameron would be a tire fire on special teams and that GG was a gamble, but BT didn't?

If reporters asked these questions we would love it but it would be the reporter's last. Only softballs from MSM.

Avatar
#21 cjc
November 08 2016, 01:17PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
6
props
everton fc wrote:

So he plays his last year in North American out of Stockton.

Could be worse, for all parties...

Now we go w/7 d-men. Sanity prevails. Kulak needs to start every game, if this rumour of his playing more than 40-odd games makes him eligible for the Expansion Draft, if left "unprotected".

Something's gotta give on the backend - how can they leave Kulak unprotected? He's arguably been our most consistent defenceman.

Does not matter how many he plays, Kulak will be eligible. If he plays 40, then he will count toward the minimum exposure requirement.

Avatar
#22 cjc
November 08 2016, 01:21PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
6
props
supra steve wrote:

"My theory is still that they were trying to get Grossman 12 games to fulfill base requirements for the expansion draft"

So how does this work exactly? My understanding is they can protect 3 (Gio, Brodie, Hamilton), that leaves Kevin and Kulak available for selection as well as Grossmann if your theory is correct...Who would you select?

Unless they are able to move both Kulak and Kevin for picks/prospects, having Grossmann gains them nothing. If I'm missing something, please let me know what.

Calgary needs at least one D exposed that meets the exposure req. (3+ year pro, 70 games over past 2 seasons or 40 this season, signed for next year). Grossman would not have qualified.

Right now only Gio, Brodie and Hamilton meet the req. Calgary needs to sign or extend at least one D before the draft.

Avatar
#23 cjc
November 08 2016, 01:22PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
2
props
supra steve wrote:

"My theory is still that they were trying to get Grossman 12 games to fulfill base requirements for the expansion draft"

So how does this work exactly? My understanding is they can protect 3 (Gio, Brodie, Hamilton), that leaves Kevin and Kulak available for selection as well as Grossmann if your theory is correct...Who would you select?

Unless they are able to move both Kulak and Kevin for picks/prospects, having Grossmann gains them nothing. If I'm missing something, please let me know what.

Calgary needs at least one D exposed that meets the exposure req. (3+ year pro, 70 games over past 2 seasons or 40 this season, signed for next year). Grossman would not have qualified.

Right now only Gio, Brodie and Hamilton meet the req. Calgary needs to sign or extend at least one D before the draft.

Avatar
#24 FlamesFanOtherCity
November 08 2016, 01:29PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
12
props
everton fc wrote:

Stajan has been one of the most consistent players, based on his role. He's helped Ferland's game, as well. Good mentor. One more year here can't hurt us, and will undoubtedly help a few of the kids.

Just like Engelland's influence on Kulak.

Waive Wideman. Retain salary. See if anyone bites. Bring up one of the kids. Wotherspoon? What do we have to lose??

Can't waive him. NMC. You can trade him with retained salary. Don't you think maybe they tried this already and 1) nobody bit or 2) Wideman said no.

Avatar
#25 jakethesnail
November 08 2016, 03:12PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
9
props
brodiegio4life wrote:

treliving figured the only way to stop gulutzan from continually playing him for no reason was to put him on waivers

Why did Tre sign him in the first place? On the good word of GG??

Avatar
#26 kittensandcookies
November 08 2016, 03:34PM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
7
props
jakethesnail wrote:

Why did Tre sign him in the first place? On the good word of GG??

I think Grossmann had goatse pictures of Treliving.

Avatar
#27 RKD
November 08 2016, 09:51PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
6
props

The Grossman signing was a big mistake, he can't skate nor can he defend. He took away a roster spot from a prospect and when he did play he got burned on goals by turning pucks over, being too slow or out of position. Kulak or Jokipakka shouldn't have had to sit a single game.

Avatar
#28 supra steve
November 09 2016, 06:28AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
3
props

@RKD

Seems to me that signing him was not the mistake, playing him was. Not a "big mistake", but a mistake.

Avatar
#29 Albertabeef
November 09 2016, 08:50AM
Trash it!
7
trashes
Props
1
props

This is the third season in a row Tre has had to dump his offseason signing shortly after the season started. This say our GM is completely inept and needs to be released.

Avatar
#30 Flint
November 09 2016, 09:30AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
1
props
cjc wrote:

Calgary needs at least one D exposed that meets the exposure req. (3+ year pro, 70 games over past 2 seasons or 40 this season, signed for next year). Grossman would not have qualified.

Right now only Gio, Brodie and Hamilton meet the req. Calgary needs to sign or extend at least one D before the draft.

Grossman needed to play just 12 NHL games this year to qualify as he played 58 last year for Phoenix.

Second, exactly. Calgary has to have one Defenseman exposed.

Avatar
#31 supra steve
November 09 2016, 09:53AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
1
props

@Flint

Kevin will have the games played to qualify, barring a season ending injury before he gets the required games in.

Avatar
#32 Parallex
November 09 2016, 10:58AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
supra steve wrote:

Seems to me that signing him was not the mistake, playing him was. Not a "big mistake", but a mistake.

Regardless of the size of the mistake the big problem I have with it is that...

A: The mistake was obvious, and

B: The mistake was repeated

Everyone makes mistakes, that should be expected, but no one should be expected to make obvious mistakes and it's downright inexcusable to remake an obvious mistake. Trelivings mistake wasn't in signing him it was in not waiving him sooner.

Avatar
#33 Flint
November 09 2016, 11:25AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@supra steve

... (edited, nevermind... answered my own question)

Comments are closed for this article.