[News] Flames/Glencross looking at Extension

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

He should have been the perfect candidate for the trade at the deadline and re-sign here.

He obviously wants to stay in Alberta, and doesn't really want to leave.

We should be talking with him saying we will re-sign you in the off-season but let us try and get you a cup at the trade deadline.

Wouldn't this extension kick in *next* year though?

[troutman]

He should refund a little bit every time he takes a penalty in the offensive zone.

[Clever_Iggy]

He's going to want to re-sign with Calgary or, in the alternative, Edmonton if he makes it to UFA status. I assume he'll want assurances that he'll be staying in the area (NTC/NMC) and will take dough off the table to do so.

Assuming a (NTC/NMC) is a must for Glencross at a reduced cap hit, I would really like to see a 3 year deal with the NMC in effect for the first 2-2.5 years (expires a month or so before the trade dealine in his final year). It may be 4 years with the same idea of an expiring NTC, but I think that's a happy medium - Glencross gets security for the bulk of his contract, but the Flames have an opportunity to trade him at the end of his deal to recoup some return.

[ForeverFlameFan]

What bothers me is this guy hasn't played a full season in 3 years. I want to see how many points he can put up with at least 75 games. I think he is still perfectly capable of hitting 50 points, but I agree that his value is decreasing.

[Poe969]

Some people said that the room was messed up because of the leadership... I honestly see Glencross as a negative in the room. He's a perfect example of playing when you want to play and floating when you wanna float. As long as you make friends with the boss, you can do anything. I think he'll have a negative influence on the young guys coming up and would do my best to try and trade him on the current contract he's on. Time to move on

[MissTeeks]

You missed this quote:

Boomer & Rhett@BoomerAndRhett · 59m

Glencross: "I told them when we did the last deal I'd take kind of a hometown discount, but I might only have a couple contracts left."

[Hugh Jahrmes]

3@3-4m and I'm fine

[Fire]

I hope the Flames don't go nuts here. I would wait until the half-way mark this season to see if he can overcome his injury issues. He's a 20 goal scorer if he can play the whole season.

[CliffFletcher]

No NTC. Handing those out to comfortable, declining veterans is what ruined the culture of this team in the first place.

[Parallex]

I would be on-board with this if, and only if, he either doesn't get a NTC or gets a very limited one. The Flames have several guys on the leftside banging at the door right now (to say nothing about the next two years).

[BlackWallStreet]

Glenny is a boss, and we're gonna need leadership.plus he gets a ton of hits and puts up points.

[Komskies]

Any chance he'd be able to convert to a RW?

[SHOGUN]

Don't blame Glencross... as a veteran on young team, who would have the motivation to play a little bit harder when you know that your team is highly unlikely to complete for a playoff spot. He's just doing enough to to help shelter to younger players, chip in a few goals and assists here and there, and provide little bit of leadership and experience.

[neo45]

More concerned with term and NTC/NMC than the dollar figure

[bubbsy]

Boomer & Rhett ‏@BoomerAndRhett 1h Glencross: "I told them when we did the last deal I'd take kind of a hometown discount, but I might only have a couple contracts left."

hmmmm....

[driveway]

I personally prefer the idea of not extending Glencross and trading him at the deadline as I feel he's going to be one of the better wingers available at the time, considering who I think are going to be the 'sellers,' and I think we could get a 1st rounder for him this spring.

However, I'd be fine with giving Glencross a short, high-dollar-value contract with no NTC. Something like 3 years at 5.5 million. Definitely an overpayment, but you give him those dollars to incentivize the short term and the lack of an NTC.

He'd get some assurance he wouldn't be moved as the dollar amount would act as a de-facto NTC until the final year of the contract, depending on how his production goes.

Also, for those who are saying he's on the 'downside', his PPG stats over the last few years have been 0.54, 0.72, 0.65, 0.63. That looks to me like someone who's had a career-year and then settled in to their average production. I think he'll probably put up around 0.60 ppg for the next three to five seasons, the only question will be how many games he plays over that time.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Hugh Jahrmes

3@3-4m and I'm fine

Wont happen. Clarkson and Bolland have skewed the market for players like this. He can make a case for close to 5. I'd perosnally rather see him go to UFA for a couple reasons:

- Hopefully by the end of this year we can see some replacements making their way up the line-up.
- He's earned mroe than he has made over the last few years. I would like to see him make up that difference, but not here.

[Wood]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Personally, I think he's already on his way down production wise.

Since becoming a Flame Glencross has scored:

08/09 - 0.54 PPG in 74 games
09/10 - 0.49 PPG in 67 games
10/11 - 0.54 PPG in 79 games
11/12 - 0.72 PPG in 67 games
12/13 - 0.65 PPG in 40 games (Lockout)
13/14 - 0.63 PPG in 38 games

Personally I think he has a few solid 40 point seasons left. Last year is the only season he's missed significant time

[The Fonz]

Crap.

The guy just doesn't care about hockey. I was really looking forward to him getting dealt at the deadline this year.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

[URL="https://twitter.com/BoomerAndRhett"] [B]


hmmmm....

yeah ... dollars and term are not something I want to attach to Glencross at this point. I'm guessing he's traded this year. /bold prediction