06-17-2017, 07:53 PM
|
#101
|
First Line Centre
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Random
OK, what assets are the Flames leaving exposed that will provide Vegas with long-term benefit?
If they don't want anybody else off the Flames' exposed list, why waste a 7th-round pick? The expansion pick has to be used regardless.
|
Poirer, Shinkaruk, Kulak, are all retained by Vegas until they're 26-27 years old. Hell even Brouwer provides at least a warm right shooting body for 3 more seasons. If Vegas really needed a centre, they could just tell Treliving they're taking Poirer but will settle with Kulak if they get Stajan for a 7th. Treliving takes that and runs.
But Vegas wont do that. They'll just sign college or KHL or NHL free agents to be their centre depth if need be. They WILL NOT waste an expansion pick on Stajan. McPhee would have to be ######ed.
|
|
|
06-17-2017, 08:11 PM
|
#102
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterJoji
Is it though? I'd be totally fine with losing Kulak or Shinkaruk as a sweetener for McPhee to take Brouwer.
Kulak might turn into a serviceable bottom 2 defenseman but Andersson, Kylington have higher ceilings and even though he a good 4 years away Fox looks real good. I feel that Morisson is about = to Kulak as well. That's 3 guys that could replace Kulak as early has next season.
Shinkaruk has been average at best in the AHL and has easily been surpassed by Jankowski and Mangiapane. Klimchuk has a good bounce back season and it's possible Pourier could have a renaissance after getting his head sorted.
|
If they like either of those guys, they can just pick one of them without taking on Brouwer. If Flames want LV to take Brouwer it will costs someone who's protected or exempt, or draft picks. Of which we don't have many anymore.
|
|
|
06-17-2017, 08:11 PM
|
#103
|
Franchise Player
|
say, wouldn't Stone count as our loss if Vegas picks him?
i was under the understanding that anyone selected prior to July 1 would count as our expansion draft sacrifice...
are people presuming that Stone won't be picked because he'll probably want to sign in calgary and LV would be wasting their pick?
I know I am hoping he signs here...
|
|
|
06-17-2017, 08:15 PM
|
#104
|
Powerplay Quarterback
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Deep South
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary
say, wouldn't Stone count as our loss if Vegas picks him?
i was under the understanding that anyone selected prior to July 1 would count as our expansion draft sacrifice...
are people presuming that Stone won't be picked because he'll probably want to sign in calgary and LV would be wasting their pick?
I know I am hoping he signs here...
|
He would have to sign with LV. They can't pick him.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Southside For This Useful Post:
|
|
06-17-2017, 08:18 PM
|
#105
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkGio
Poirer, Shinkaruk, Kulak, are all retained by Vegas until they're 26-27 years old.
|
Or until they are lost on waivers. None of them appears to have significant trade value at this point, so Vegas would have to find room for them on their 23-man roster or risk losing them for nothing.
Quote:
Hell even Brouwer provides at least a warm right shooting body for 3 more seasons.
|
And costs $13.5 million over that time, while performing (so far) like a replacement-level player.
There's a reason why so many Flames fans are praying that Vegas is dumb enough to take Brouwer off our hands.
Quote:
If Vegas really needed a centre, they could just tell Treliving they're taking Poirer but will settle with Kulak if they get Stajan for a 7th. Treliving takes that and runs.
|
Why is it an advantage to lose Kulak and Stajan in order to keep Poirier? At the moment, we are hoping Poirier recovers from his problems sufficiently that he doesn't turn out a total bust. But it's just that, a hope. He hasn't proved a thing yet.
Quote:
But Vegas wont do that. They'll just sign college or KHL or NHL free agents to be their centre depth if need be. They WILL NOT waste an expansion pick on Stajan. McPhee would have to be ######ed.
|
He'd have to be even dumber to waste an expansion pick AND $13.5 million on Brouwer.
Poirier is a complete question mark, and therefore unlikely to be worth using an expansion pick on.
Kulak is an AHL defenceman at this point, who showed last season that he was not up to a regular NHL job yet, and since he is now waiver-eligible, his trade value is basically zero. Vegas will have dozens of bona fide #4-6 NHL defencemen to choose from, and only so many roster spots for them. I don't see the value in Kulak either as a roster player or as trade material.
Vegas might want Shinkaruk, but he, too, is waiver-eligible and has proved very little at the NHL level. If they are sufficiently hard up for offence from the wing, they may take him as a roster player, but they won't be taking him as trade bait.
Everything depends on what the other 29 exposed lists look like. Centre is liable to be the hardest position to fill, since most teams will be protecting seven forwards and will naturally tend to prefer players at the more valuable position. McPhee is likely to find plenty of options on the wing, but not nearly as much at centre – and I very much doubt he is going to have free agents or KHLers centring all four lines in October.
Stajan may be garbage from McPhee's point of view, but at least that piece of garbage is the same shape as a hole that needs to be filled. That alone puts him one step ahead of the rest of the Flames' garbage.
__________________
WARNING: The preceding message may not have been processed in a sarcasm-free facility.
Last edited by Jay Random; 06-17-2017 at 08:21 PM.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Jay Random For This Useful Post:
|
|
06-17-2017, 08:20 PM
|
#106
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southside
He would have to sign with LV. They can't pick him.
|
But if he does sign with Vegas before the expansion draft, he counts as their pick from the Flames.
__________________
WARNING: The preceding message may not have been processed in a sarcasm-free facility.
|
|
|
06-17-2017, 08:42 PM
|
#107
|
Powerplay Quarterback
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Deep South
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Random
But if he does sign with Vegas before the expansion draft, he counts as their pick from the Flames.
|
Correct.
|
|
|
06-17-2017, 08:42 PM
|
#108
|
First Line Centre
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Random
Or until they are lost on waivers. None of them appears to have significant trade value at this point, so Vegas would have to find room for them on their 23-man roster or risk losing them for nothing.
And costs $13.5 million over that time, while performing (so far) like a replacement-level player.
There's a reason why so many Flames fans are praying that Vegas is dumb enough to take Brouwer off our hands.
Why is it an advantage to lose Kulak and Stajan in order to keep Poirier? At the moment, we are hoping Poirier recovers from his problems sufficiently that he doesn't turn out a total bust. But it's just that, a hope. He hasn't proved a thing yet.
He'd have to be even dumber to waste an expansion pick AND $13.5 million on Brouwer.
Poirier is a complete question mark, and therefore unlikely to be worth using an expansion pick on.
Kulak is an AHL defenceman at this point, who showed last season that he was not up to a regular NHL job yet, and since he is now waiver-eligible, his trade value is basically zero. Vegas will have dozens of bona fide #4-6 NHL defencemen to choose from, and only so many roster spots for them. I don't see the value in Kulak either as a roster player or as trade material.
Vegas might want Shinkaruk, but he, too, is waiver-eligible and has proved very little at the NHL level. If they are sufficiently hard up for offence from the wing, they may take him as a roster player, but they won't be taking him as trade bait.
Everything depends on what the other 29 exposed lists look like. Centre is liable to be the hardest position to fill, since most teams will be protecting seven forwards and will naturally tend to prefer players at the more valuable position. McPhee is likely to find plenty of options on the wing, but not nearly as much at centre – and I very much doubt he is going to have free agents or KHLers centring all four lines in October.
Stajan may be garbage from McPhee's point of view, but at least that piece of garbage is the same shape as a hole that needs to be filled. That alone puts him one step ahead of the rest of the Flames' garbage.
|
I can't tell you what McPhee will do per say, but chances are they're taking a lot of defensemen, some of which they will trade for centreman or picks. I think by the time they've traded away a lot of the assets they required through expansion for futures, they'll likely turn to free agency and young promising guys to fill out their roster.
And think about it man, if Poirer doesn't make the WORST roster in the league made up from the scraps of the league, then who is so bad they will claim him and clog their roster with him?
|
|
|
06-17-2017, 08:55 PM
|
#109
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Calgary, AB
|
Also upcoming UFAs are not the worst for Las Vegas, those players tend to be easier to move for Draft Picks at the trade deadline and in the season.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to SuperMatt18 For This Useful Post:
|
|
06-17-2017, 08:57 PM
|
#110
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperMatt18
Also upcoming UFAs are not the worst for Las Vegas, those players tend to be easier to move for Draft Picks at the trade deadline and in the season.
|
Depending on how he plays of course, Neal could fetch them a nice little return at the deadline next year.
__________________
I hate just about everyone and just about everything.
|
|
|
06-17-2017, 08:57 PM
|
#111
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary
|
__________________
The Quest stands upon the edge of a knife. Stray but a little, and it will fail, to the ruin of all. Yet hope remains while the Company is true. Go Flames Go!
Pain heals. Chicks dig scars. Glory... lasts forever.
|
|
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to MissTeeks For This Useful Post:
|
|
06-17-2017, 08:58 PM
|
#112
|
All I can get
|
Intrigued to see what Curtis Lazar brings to the table. I think the Flames committed Grand Theft Larceny and trading Beef Jerky Jokey Packer, who isn't even in the league any more.
|
|
|
06-17-2017, 09:01 PM
|
#113
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Here
|
Another angle to look at this is: which player (on the Flames' unprotected list) would be coveted by another team. Vegas might not be able to use, for example, Shinkaruk, but if another team was willing to pony up a significant piece for him, Vegas will pick him from the Flames
|
|
|
06-17-2017, 09:01 PM
|
#114
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SW Ontario
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1qqaaz
If the Flames can convince Vegas to take Brouwer, the Flames might be able to sign Oshie for that top line RW spot. That'd be nice.
|
No it wouldn't. That would be shedding a bad contract only to add another one.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to dissentowner For This Useful Post:
|
|
06-17-2017, 09:09 PM
|
#115
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Random
But if he does sign with Vegas before the expansion draft, he counts as their pick from the Flames.
|
What's stopping Stone (or any other pending UFA) from having a handshake deal with LV where he waits and signs on July 1 instead (so that LV can still take a player from Calgary in the expansion draft)?
|
|
|
06-17-2017, 09:11 PM
|
#116
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop
Intrigued to see what Curtis Lazar brings to the table. I think the Flames committed Grand Theft Larceny and trading Beef Jerky Jokey Packer, who isn't even in the league any more.
|
They gave up a second round pick for Lazar. Jokipakka was more or less a throw-in...
|
|
|
06-17-2017, 09:19 PM
|
#117
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Kamloops
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvp2003
What's stopping Stone (or any other pending UFA) from having a handshake deal with LV where he waits and signs on July 1 instead (so that LV can still take a player from Calgary in the expansion draft)?
|
Tampering?
|
|
|
06-17-2017, 09:21 PM
|
#118
|
First Line Centre
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvp2003
What's stopping Stone (or any other pending UFA) from having a handshake deal with LV where he waits and signs on July 1 instead (so that LV can still take a player from Calgary in the expansion draft)?
|
Security of a contract I guess
|
|
|
06-17-2017, 09:22 PM
|
#119
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Indiana
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dissentowner
No it wouldn't. That would be shedding a bad contract only to add another one.
|
Let's look at the Flames relatively recent FA signings in which the player earned 4+ million dollars a year:
Brouwer: Bad
Frolik: Good
Hiller: Good/Bad
Hudler: Great
Wideman: Good/Bad
If you want to decrease the dollar amount, Tanguay, Jokinen, and Morrison were all good signings. Engelland was probably okay. Chad Johnson was pretty good. Versteeg was good, and Raymond was awful.
Overall, the Flames have a pretty strong track record.
Save Raymond, all the signings with players under 31 were quite good. Players who are overpaid are often exactly like Brouwer. Tough, full of intangibles, relatively low on skill.
|
|
|
06-17-2017, 09:23 PM
|
#120
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvp2003
What's stopping Stone (or any other pending UFA) from having a handshake deal with LV where he waits and signs on July 1 instead (so that LV can still take a player from Calgary in the expansion draft)?
|
I think it is more likely, including based on BT's comments from a week ago, that the handshake deal is with the Flames.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Jiri Hrdina For This Useful Post:
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:30 PM.
|
|