[Signing] Flames re-sign Lazar (2 yrs, $950k AAV)

[Insufficient Funds]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

Is this a decent contract with little risk and some potential upside? Yup, I agree with that. When you factor in we gave up a 2nd round pick for it, that's where the shine definitely comes off. Bottom 6 players are easily had, and can easily be filled by someone from the farm at the same or cheaper price. I don't think you use a 2nd round pick for depth unless it's at the trade deadline, you are a in a position to win now, and the player you are getting back is a proven commodity.

I give Treliving a great deal of credit, but this is not a deal I can ever get behind. Hopefully Lazar proves me wrong and lights it up, but I don't that's going to be the case. We bought far too high on Lazar in my opinion. Probably going to be another Shinkaruk. Recognizable name, who really isn't going to ever live up to it.

You say you don't like that the Flames spent a 2nd on him because one of our prospects could fill the same roll. Obviously management disagrees and Lazar is ready to play now. Outside of Janko, no one is ready to make the jump on the forward group. I would rather have a 22 year old kid on an under $1m contract for the whole season than some scrub vet at the deadline. The difference between Lazar and Shrink? Ones an NHLer ones not.

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

Drafted 17th in a pretty deep 2013 likely means he has a bit more upside than you suggest. Even if he is destined as a bottom 6, it isn't "easy" to find good bottom 6 players. I don't know the exact stats, but I think it is something like 85% of second rounders wouldn't get that far in the NHL.

I do agree that this isn't really that big a deal, but I do think it is a decent one. He doesn't need to light it up for it to be a positive for the Flames.

It is easy to find a bottom 6 player though, especially when you dangle a second round draft pick. Lazar is a project, not a commodity. You don't pay a second for a project. Can he turn out, absolutely. Are the odds likely in our favour, nope.

The point is we didn't pay a 4th or 5th round pick for this project, we paid a 2nd which I think is an extremely high price for someone who really has a limited ceiling. People seem to talk on here like he was a free addition.

Say we are contending this year and need some help at the deadline. A 2nd could land us someone like Brian Boyle. Basically the pick of the litter of any bottom 6 player available.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

It is easy to find a bottom 6 player though, especially when you dangle a second round draft pick. Lazar is a project, not a commodity. You don't pay a second for a project. Can he turn out, absolutely. Are the odds likely in our favour, nope.

The point is we didn't pay a 4th or 5th round pick for this project, we paid a 2nd which I think is an extremely high price for someone who really has a limited ceiling. People seem to talk on here like he was a free addition.

Say we are contending this year and need some help at the deadline. A 2nd could land us someone like Brian Boyle. Basically the pick of the litter of any bottom 6 player available.

I'm a little more optimistic for Lazar than you, however seeing how our offseason went I definitely agree with the value of a second rounder and specifically how important it would have been to this team with the sheer volume of picks we spent on Stone, Smith and Hamonic.

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by Insufficient Funds

You say you don't like that the Flames spent a 2nd on him because one of our prospects could fill the same roll. Obviously management disagrees and Lazar is ready to play now. Outside of Janko, no one is ready to make the jump on the forward group. I would rather have a 22 year old kid on an under $1m contract for the whole season than some scrub vet at the deadline. The difference between Lazar and Shrink? Ones an NHLer ones not.

Since when is Lazar an NHLer? Because Ottawa stapled him to the bench for s 2 seasons? Management here might think that about Lazar, but Ottawa's sure doesn't or he would still be there. I don't think other teams were chomping at the bit to pickup Lazar either, because he was widely known to be available and if it wasn't for the Flames swooping in last second, he would not have been moved.

Hopefully the kid pans out here, but there seems to be some train of thought on this board that he's more than he is.

[IgiTang]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

Where is all this potential people are talking about with Lazar? Is it because he smiles a lot and we remember him from a WJHC tournament that often never translates to NHL success? The guy was never slotted to be anything other than a bottom 6 player, mono or not.

Is this a decent contract with little risk and some potential upside? Yup, I agree with that. When you factor in we gave up a 2nd round pick for it, that's where the shine definitely comes off. Bottom 6 players are easily had, and can easily be filled by someone from the farm at the same or cheaper price. I don't think you use a 2nd round pick for depth unless it's at the trade deadline, you are a in a position to win now, and the player you are getting back is a proven commodity.

I give Treliving a great deal of credit, but this is not a deal I can ever get behind. Hopefully Lazar proves me wrong and lights it up, but I don't that's going to be the case. We bought far too high on Lazar in my opinion. Probably going to be another Shinkaruk. Recognizable name, who really isn't going to ever live up to it.

Lets get a bit of perspective here...

First off, a bonafide or sure bet sub-25 yr old top 6 player is worth a helluva lot more than a 2nd rd. pick.

Every club has guys on the farm that can fill the bottom 6 roles, as you stated.

So would a sub-25 yr old player with upside and potential top 6 ability not be worth about.. a 2nd rd pick?

A 3rd rounder is for a stop gap but NHL ready mid 20's player that likely wont ever see top 6 minutes.

A 4th rounder is a player much like the value for a 3rd rounder, but would likely be a healthy scratch at some point.

If we are going to place a value of the kind of player you should be getting back for a certain pick of a round, then to have that discussion, the entire spectrum of picks traded for players needs to have a value.

And with that said, IMO, Curtis Lazar is worth exactly a 2nd rd pick at this moment in his career.

[wireframe]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Teams do not have similar lists early in the draft so that would be a bad assumption to make. I agree with the previous poster, should look at a 2nd rounder as a commodity worth what 2nd rounders are typically traded for.

How do you value a second pick then? We agree that some drafts are strong and some are weak. So you can't use value from previous drafts. There is also a huge value different between pick 31 and pick 60.

I think that the only way to set a value is to look at the player you would have taken. Now, we can't know who the Flames would have taken. They have a good idea of who they would be taking when the pick was traded but we don't have that information. So I think you can look at who the senators took as a rough approximation. And da-chief noted that if you look at the 5 players taken before and after, you can probably get close to who the Flames would have taken.

That brings us to your comment that lists are dissimilar. How similar do you think the lists are? I assume that the Flames and senators would rank all the same players and its rare that any player would be more then ten spots apart on the two lists in the 1st round. I'll guess that there is about twice as much spread in the 2nd round. That's what I mean by similar.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

It is easy to find a bottom 6 player though, especially when you dangle a second round draft pick. Lazar is a project, not a commodity. You don't pay a second for a project. Can he turn out, absolutely. Are the odds likely in our favour, nope.

The point is we didn't pay a 4th or 5th round pick for this project, we paid a 2nd which I think is an extremely high price for someone who really has a limited ceiling. People seem to talk on here like he was a free addition.

Say we are contending this year and need some help at the deadline. A 2nd could land us someone like Brian Boyle. Basically the pick of the litter of any bottom 6 player available.

A 2nd may land you a rental bottom 6 player at the deadline, sure. This isn't a deadline deal. It is a deal for a cost-controlled young player with a decent pedigree. As BT mentioned at the STH lunch, think of it as drafting a ready (or near ready) NHL player with the 47th overall pick (or whatever it ended up being). You should do that 10/10 times.

Edit: I meant "rental" rather than "deadline" deal.

[Insufficient Funds]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

Since when is Lazar an NHLer? Because Ottawa stapled him to the bench for s 2 seasons? Management here might think that about Lazar, but Ottawa's sure doesn't or he would still be there. I don't think other teams were chomping at the bit to pickup Lazar either, because he was widely known to be available and if it wasn't for the Flames swooping in last second, he would not have been moved.

Hopefully the kid pans out here, but there seems to be some train of thought on this board that he's more than he is.

You don't know that the Flames were the only team. That's speculation at best. There's plenty of examples of teams giving a second for a guy that needs a change of scenery. 180 games played and a 2 year 1 way deal says he's an NHLer.

[JFK]

We need to separate the current NHL and the old NHL. The separation of good to bottom line players isn't 6-6 anymore, it's not top six bottom six. It's top 9 and bottom three. Bottom three players are dime a dozen. Good smart players that can play a two-way game and chip in 10-15 are valuable.

Curtis Lazar is a versatile player, strong two-way game, can play middle or either wing. His offensive upside is limited but he reminds me of Glencross before Curits got broke down and busted. Probably not verging on 50 points Glencross but that third line complimentary player who can be put anywhere in the line up and be a positive factor.

Is he currently an NHL player? I don't know, we'll find out in the fall, but he looked like it.

[Gaudfather]

Originally Posted by JFK

We need to separate the current NHL and the old NHL. The separation of good to bottom line players isn't 6-6 anymore, it's not top six bottom six. It's top 9 and bottom three. Bottom three players are dime a dozen. Good smart players that can play a two-way game and chip in 10-15 are valuable.

Curtis Lazar is a versatile player, strong two-way game, can play middle or either wing. His offensive upside is limited but he reminds me of Glencross before Curits got broke down and busted. Probably not verging on 50 points Glencross but that third line complimentary player who can be put anywhere in the line up and be a positive factor.

Is he currently an NHL player? I don't know, we'll find out in the fall, but he looked like it.

It may be too early too definitively state this. There were times in Jr that he showed great offensive prowess. If Lazar earns the ice time and has linemates who can skate he could easily be a 30 - 40 pt player. Clearly a lot depends on him.

[Jiri Hrdina]

You can go out and a get a bottom 6 player via free agency, but chances are that means you are going to pay more than you want for that type of player.
You are giving up the upside that the 2nd rounder would have netted you a better player - but the chances of that actually happening are very remote.
Lazar is a better player than most that will be drafted in the 2nd round.
Add to that the low salary and that's why he was worth a 2nd.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by wireframe

How do you value a second pick then? We agree that some drafts are strong and some are weak. So you can't use value from previous drafts. There is also a huge value different between pick 31 and pick 60.

I think that the only way to set a value is to look at the player you would have taken. Now, we can't know who the Flames would have taken. They have a good idea of who they would be taking when the pick was traded but we don't have that information. So I think you can look at who the senators took as a rough approximation. And da-chief noted that if you look at the 5 players taken before and after, you can probably get close to who the Flames would have taken.

That brings us to your comment that lists are dissimilar. How similar do you think the lists are? I assume that the Flames and senators would rank all the same players and its rare that any player would be more then ten spots apart on the two lists in the 1st round. I'll guess that there is about twice as much spread in the 2nd round. That's what I mean by similar.

Teams don't rank all the same players. I've seen drafts where a player would be ranked 1st or 2nd round by some teams and would be on other teams do not draft list. Ramzi Abid in '98 comes to mind, he was ranked in the first, went early second I think but wasn't on some teams list at all because of bad skating. The disparity can come from a player having questionable skating or character. Some teams will overlook these things and other teams will put up a red flag over it and refuse to draft that player

Players can easily be greater than 10 spots apart even in the first. A team may have a player as a 1st rounder that another team doesn't have in the first couple rounds.

People would be shocked how different the team lists are if we had access to them.

[wireframe]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Teams don't rank all the same players. I've seen drafts where a player would be ranked 1st or 2nd round by some teams and would be on other teams do not draft list. Randi Abid in '98 comes to mind. The disparity can come from a player having questionable skating or character. Some teams will overlook these things and other teams will put up a red flag over it and refuse to draft that ayer

Players can easily be greater than 10 spots apart even in the first. A team may have a player as a 1st rounder that another team doesn't have in the first couple rounds.

People would be shocked how different the team lists are if we had access to them.

Are you saying that you've seen NHL draft lists? If you have, I will believe you. It's sometimes hard to tell if people are certain because they have evidence or because they are stubborn on this board.

[belsarius]

Looking at his draft year, no one drafted out of the 1st round has played more games and only two players after the 1st round has scored more points.

For the 2012 draft year there are 7 players outside of the first round that has scored more points. And 4 players have played more games.

For 2011, 15 players have played more games and 17 has scored more points.

Sure it's possible to have used the 2nd to get a better player, but its more likely to have used that 2nd and got a worse player. And this is with a season wasted from mono. If the Flames had used a 2nd round pick to pick up the player Lazar is today it is looking like it was a good use of a draft pick, so trading him for a 2nd seems to me like a good use of the pick.

[Anduril]

Originally Posted by wireframe

But it does make sense to compare the player picked if you assume that teams have similar lists, which is a fair assumption early in the draft. A second round pick can't have a set value because each draft if unique.

Which you really can't because there's no way to tell who valued who to what degree. Each team's pick will affect the ones proceeding it making it a completely subjective and arbitrary. A 2nd round value being equal to a Wotherspoon or a Kucherov is an extreme spectrum to be moving between.

Add in the differences of organizational scouting resources, league priorities, characteristics and attributes ranking and to some varying degree of positional need influence and you're already using something barely related.

Bottom line, the scouting and development of other teams, something you have little to not influence over should not be measured in determining the value of a pick.

Fans might not know of a quantifiable value of picks but can use historical data from the players picked in that range as well as previous trades using similar picks as basis.
The unknown and specific pick-turned-prospect is a narrow and arbitrary way of rating a trade.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by wireframe

Are you saying that you've seen NHL draft lists? If you have, I will believe you. It's sometimes hard to tell if people are certain because they have evidence or because they are stubborn on this board.

I have not. But from having read as much pre and post draft stuff and watched every draft over the past 20 years it has become obvious that teams and scouting services disagree wildly, even over players you'd think might be consensus 1st rounders. It's become obvious to me there's no consensus at all outside of maybe the top 2-3 picks. And some years those aren't consensus either. See 2012 where some teams had Galchenyuk 1st (CGY), some Ryan Murray (EDM's scouts lol), some Morgan Rielly (TOR), some maybe even Yakupov (no hard evidence of it).

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by JFK

We need to separate the current NHL and the old NHL. The separation of good to bottom line players isn't 6-6 anymore, it's not top six bottom six. It's top 9 and bottom three. Bottom three players are dime a dozen. Good smart players that can play a two-way game and chip in 10-15 are valuable.

Curtis Lazar is a versatile player, strong two-way game, can play middle or either wing. His offensive upside is limited but he reminds me of Glencross before Curits got broke down and busted. Probably not verging on 50 points Glencross but that third line complimentary player who can be put anywhere in the line up and be a positive factor.

Is he currently an NHL player? I don't know, we'll find out in the fall, but he looked like it.

He did score at a 51 goal / 94 point pace during his 18 year old season in Junior. That'd have been pretty much an identical draft+1 season to what Matthew Phillips just gave us, except in a beefy 6'0", 210 lb power forward frame.

I haven't watched enough of him to guess what we have in him, but maybe they view him as having similar offensive upside to Micheal Ferland, which could make him a 25-goal type winger who can play up the line up. I found it especially interesting that they flat out said he was rushed into the NHL by the Sens.

[JohnnyTitan]

I started the comparison to Alex Formenton because I recall so many outraged with giving up a 2nd for Lazar. A tonne of Flames fans like the move too, but some were strangely hell-bent on stating that the 2nd was way more valuable.

A couple points I'd like to isolate and stress:

1) Treliving obviously has decided the Flames are starting a (minimum) three-year window of contending. Lazar has a chance to help out during this time-frame. Even a good 2nd round pick would not be helping in the next three seasons. Lazar fits the age of our young core and our compete window.

2) Someone above noted that Lazar is a "Project" and you shouldn't spend a 2nd on a "Project". I think a 2nd by the very definition of the pick is a huge project. Hell -> Klimchuk and Poirier and Shinkaruk are projects and they were picked 1st round of a strong draft!

3) Of course the Flames wouldn't likely pick Alex Formenton with #47 overall. But I think it's flawed to do any other comparison. In my opinion...if you look at the 5 or 6 picks following #47 OA negative posters will always cherry-pick the best of the bunch and claim we could have had that player instead of Lazar. But the Flames wouldn't have got 6 shots at making the pick...just one. So that's the comparison as ridiculous and hypothetical and pointless as it is!!

Still stoked with the trade. So not-a-rental. Treliving, as always, had a great plan when executing the move. The lack of play at the end of the year proves that. Now it's up to Lazar to prove him right! I know he'll be motivated!

[Since1984]

Originally Posted by JohnnyTitan

I started the comparison to Alex Formenton because I recall so many outraged with giving up a 2nd for Lazar. A tonne of Flames fans like the move too, but some were strangely hell-bent on stating that the 2nd was way more valuable.

A couple points I'd like to isolate and stress:

1) Treliving obviously has decided the Flames are starting a (minimum) three-year window of contending. Lazar has a chance to help out during this time-frame. Even a good 2nd round pick would not be helping in the next three seasons. Lazar fits the age of our young core and our compete window.

2) Someone above noted that Lazar is a "Project" and you shouldn't spend a 2nd on a "Project". I think a 2nd by the very definition of the pick is a huge project. Hell -> Klimchuk and Poirier and Shinkaruk are projects and they were picked 1st round of a strong draft!

3) Of course the Flames wouldn't likely pick Alex Formenton with #47 overall. But I think it's flawed to do any other comparison. In my opinion...if you look at the 5 or 6 picks following #47 OA negative posters will always cherry-pick the best of the bunch and claim we could have had that player instead of Lazar. But the Flames wouldn't have got 6 shots at making the pick...just one. So that's the comparison as ridiculous and hypothetical and pointless as it is!!

Still stoked with the trade. So not-a-rental. Treliving, as always, had a great plan when executing the move. The lack of play at the end of the year proves that. Now it's up to Lazar to prove him right! I know he'll be motivated!

In my perspective..I tend to look at the players that you could have drafted at that point. IE Maxime Comtois, Jake Leschyshyn and Jack Studnicka along with Formenton. But alas you will never know who the Flames had high on their board.

I am more than happy with Lazar over those players at this time. I think he could be a huge dark horse for our team this year.

[DoubleF]

I ran into this idea elsewhere and wonder what CP collective thinks about this idea about Lazar. The idea essentially was this:

Send Lazar down to the AHL around pre-season roster shaving time (so most teams don't have room to claim him) and have him play a few months at C before calling him back up.

Could Lazar being snuck into the AHL even be plausible?


Pros:
- Gives Lazar plenty of playing time to develop more a centre rather than bottom 6 minutes at RW
- Helps repair certain aspects of Lazar's development due to him being rushed
- Reduces RW logjam of Brouwer/F Hamilton/Hathaway/Chiasson (if re-signed)
- Lazar has openly been called a project. Him with his draft peers in Stockton might not be a bad thing. All of them looking for redemption.
- More roster slots = more competitive camp?

Cons
- Waiving Lazar isn't completely without risk
- Optics are bad
- Does it affect Lazar's game negatively more than positively?
- Lazar may develop better around NHLers than AHLers.

Thoughts?