Ongoing - Elliott Friedman's 30 Thoughts (Wednesdays)

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Poe969

I don't think going after an older goalie is a good idea at this point. You want a goalie who can grow with the team and the King's window of eliteness isn't long enough. I'd be over the moon for Price because he's younger...and better.

But Price is going to get $10M.

Which I would absolutely pay him, but I don't see Montreal letting him go, as they're an AHL team without him.

A note on Lundqvist, his actual salary in the last year of his deal is $4.5M. To buy him out only costs us 1.5 against the cap over two years if his play has fallen off.

But he's been a .920 guy for his entire career. Again, I think it would be an option worth considering, albeit a complex one to make work

[Jaydee]

Seems like there's a lot of goalies available for next season and not of teams looking for a starter. Maybe Calgary can get Bishop for cheap

[Poe969]

that's true. I'm just saying that if they're going to target an older goalie that goalie shouldn't be nearing the end of their career. Price in his prime but the King is in the twilight of his career. I just think the Flames should try to get someone who's closer to the beginning of their career or at least has a long shelf life left.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Jaydee

Seems like there's a lot of goalies available for next season and not of teams looking for a starter. Maybe Calgary can get Bishop for cheap

If they sign Bishop then they pretty well have to re-sign Johnson because the team will likely need a backup that can play for a few weeks or more given Bishop's penchant for missing games.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

But Price is going to get $10M.

Which I would absolutely pay him, but I don't see Montreal letting him go, as they're an AHL team without him.

A note on Lundqvist, his actual salary in the last year of his deal is $4.5M. To buy him out only costs us 1.5 against the cap over two years if his play has fallen off.

But he's been a .920 guy for his entire career. Again, I think it would be an option worth considering, albeit a complex one to make work

I can't see any team giving a goalie 10m. Price will land somewhere for 6.5 to 7. Even if he ends up with the same annual salary anywhere else, it's a pretty significant raise for him because of the ridiculous Quebec taxes.

[Anduril]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Not that the Rags would trade him, but just a hypothetical. What would you offer for Lundqvist?

He's 35 years old, and has four years left at $8.5. If the Rangers retained $2.5M, I would look long and hard at it.

Yikes. Let's not help the Rangers relieve themselves out of another an anchor of a contract. Lundqvist has return to a bit of form since struggling a little earlier but paying $6M for an aging goalie who's less likely to put in consistent stretches of elite or even good play is not a smart investment. Bishop at 6v6 is probably a better idea if you were forced to spend big on a goalie.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Poe969

that's true. I'm just saying that if they're going to target an older goalie that goalie shouldn't be nearing the end of their career. Price in his prime but the King is in the twilight of his career. I just think the Flames should try to get someone who's closer to the beginning of their career or at least has a long shelf life left.

I'm fine with the stop-gaps but eventually Gillies and/or Parsons have to eventually become NHL players or the Flames scouts and AHL affiliate have failed them.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by nik-

I can't see any team giving a goalie 10m. Price will land somewhere for 6.5 to 7. Even if he ends up with the same annual salary anywhere else, it's a pretty significant raise for him because of the ridiculous Quebec taxes.

I can't see how Price would even consider signing below $8 million per. The guy is a notch or two better than every other goalie in the world not named Holtby and Dubnyk.

[Poe969]

We can't blame the scouts if these guys don't pan out IMO. They look like they should be good goalies at least but if their play falls off, it should be on them.


Either way, a stop gap goalie has to have at least 3 good years in him. Bishop is an option but he'll want longer than 3 years. Elliot seems like a decent option for 3 years but and guys like Mrazek or Sarso or whatever haven't earned a 3 year deal yet. I still want the Flames to find a way to get Murray from the pens because he'd be perfect. He's good now with the potential to be great and if any of the Flames goalie prospects step up, good goalies are an amazing currency. I wouldn't be surprised if BT somehow got Murray before the expansion draft.

[Corral]

Short term goalies are fine here for another season or maybe two, but after that there needs to be a solid #1 here or this team will miss its championship run with this core. I don't really care who they sign for the next couple years, but i hope they do not go 6X6 on a veteran who may or may not work out.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

A note on Lundqvist, his actual salary in the last year of his deal is $4.5M. To buy him out only costs us 1.5 against the cap over two years if his play has fallen off.

I don't think that is how it works. Here's the breakdown, based on ‘Illustration #1’ in section 50.5 of the CBA:

                     Avg    Year 1  Year 2
1   Original SPC Amt $8.5m  $4.5m
2   Original SPC AV  $8.5m  $8.5m   $8.5m
3   Buyout Amount           $3.0m
    (2/3 of line 1)
4   Buyout Payment          $1.5m   $1.5m
5   Buyout Savings          $3.0m
    (line 1 minus line 4)
6   Cap hit                 $5.5m   $1.5m
    (line 2 minus line 5)

Because the Rangers got Lundqvist for a cap hit smaller than his actual salary all those years (back-diving contract), there is a sort of ‘balloon payment’ cap hit on the buyout. That would be a lousy thing to get stuck with.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I'm fine with the stop-gaps but eventually Gillies and/or Parsons have to eventually become NHL players or the Flames scouts and AHL affiliate have failed them.

We're awfully willing to place our faith in developing a home grown goalie when you consider we haven't done it since Vernon.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

Because he sucked - badly, for 75% of the season?

Also, because better goalies are available in free agency and they won't cost us a 3rd round pick to sign.

I find it odd how quickly people turn on players here. For the positive and the negative. 10 good games is enough to throw away 20 terrible ones, simply because they're the most recent games played...

I don't disagree with you, but people also can't act like Elliott's only body of work is what he's done this season. I'm not sold on extending Elliott yet at all, but right now, the first 75% of this season is more likely to be the anomaly for Elliott than his last stretch of good performance.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

I don't think that is how it works. Here's the breakdown, based on ‘Illustration #1’ in section 50.5 of the CBA:

                     Avg    Year 1  Year 2
1   Original SPC Amt $8.5m  $4.5m
2   Original SPC AV  $8.5m  $8.5m   $8.5m
3   Buyout Amount           $3.0m
    (2/3 of line 1)
4   Buyout Payment          $1.5m   $1.5m
5   Buyout Savings          $3.0m
    (line 1 minus line 4)
6   Cap hit                 $5.5m   $1.5m
    (line 2 minus line 5)

Because the Rangers got Lundqvist for a cap hit smaller than his actual salary all those years (back-diving contract), there is a sort of ‘balloon payment’ cap hit on the buyout. That would be a lousy thing to get stuck with.

I'm just going off the capfriendly buyout calculator, you may be right

[tsquared1967]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

Available goaltenders:
Elliott
Fleury
Bishop
Mason
Miller
Kuemper
Johnson
Nilsson
Bernier
Howard/Mrazek
Raanta/Lundqvist


Edit: should have included Philadelphia

Fleury, Howard, Mrazek, Raanta and Lundqvist would require somekind of a trade with their current team or Las Vegas. Fleury, Howard, Mrazek and Lunqvist cap hit might be too high if the Flames are looking for a backup in free agency as well. I think the Flames need to promote either Rittich or Gillies to have flexibility with the salary cap.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

I'm just going off the capfriendly buyout calculator, you may be right

In any event, Lunqvist is a bad idea. The contract is too long and he is really starting to show his age. I wouldn't bet on him having more than another good year or two in him, and the Flames would get killed by the cap hit in the final 2–3 years of that contract.

[Torture]

Lots that could play out with the expansion draft so Treliving has options but I'd be comfortable going with Elliott on a 2-3 year provided it's a reasonable cap hit and he continues his current play to finish the season and into the playoffs.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by nik-

I can't see any team giving a goalie 10m. Price will land somewhere for 6.5 to 7. Even if he ends up with the same annual salary anywhere else, it's a pretty significant raise for him because of the ridiculous Quebec taxes.

green text? Price will be making more than that I can assure you.

1st place team with him
near last without him

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Torture

Lots that could play out with the expansion draft so Treliving has options but I'd be comfortable going with Elliott on a 2-3 year provided it's a reasonable cap hit and he continues his current play to finish the season and into the playoffs.

It also costs the Flames a 3rd to sign Elliott

maybe another team should sign him and trade him to the Flames for a 6th?

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

I'm just going off the capfriendly buyout calculator, you may be right

https://www.capfriendly.com/buyout_c...nrik-lundqvist

If he was boughtout before his last season, he would have a 5.5M Cap hit that season (as opposed to 8.5M) and a 1.5M cap hit the following season.