No insult intended to Reinprecht or Conroy, but think about it: Iginla has managed to emerge as a dominant player without ever in his career playign with a front line, playmaking centre. Just imagine what his numbers would look like playing with Sakic, Forsberg, Thornton, etc.
Just a thought, but I think the Flames owe it to their fans, to Iginla, and, frankly, to history to pull out all the stops and do whatever it takes to acquire that #1 guy. Anything short of Regehr, Kipper and Iginla himself, in a trade, would be all right by me. Iggy has abotu 6 productive years left; the right C could make them historic ones, IMO.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Temporary_User
I will eat a pubic hair if Giordano ever plays in the NHL again
They just don't have the money to add a guy though.
That leaves you with a trade that moves as much salary out as you bring in. If a Toni Lydman and a draft pick can get you that number one center than I think you have a chance ... otherwise there just isn't any room to move.
Originally posted by theikon@Jul 30 2004, 02:28 PM I dont buy for one minute that the Flames owners don't have money.
Oil is $43/barrel.
I agree they have the money. That playoff run alone had to have given back some decent cash. They should also be getting higher ticket sales/concession for next year and more advertising.
Originally posted by theikon@Jul 30 2004, 08:28 AM I dont buy for one minute that the Flames owners don't have money.
Oil is $43/barrel.
Amazing to me to see fans still putting up comments like that.
That is why hockey is in such a huge mess right now ... people not keeping an eye on the bottom line.
The Flames as a business with x number of owners can maintain a payroll level of roughly 35 million. To go beyond that would be to lose money and drive player salaries up across the league (or repeat the offences of the recent past).
Being successful in other walks of life doesn't mean you have to get hammered in hockey.
Originally posted by Bingo@Jul 30 2004, 02:01 PM
Evolve Lombardi! Evolve!
IMO, hes the next Martin St. Louis.
Will he win the Hart Trophy, and Art Ross Trophy? Probably not. But I dont think 75-80 points is not out of the question.
He has tremendous raw talent, and he just needs to learn how to play in the NHL, like how to fight through all the checking etc........
I maybe overrating him a little because I am dillusional and I want him to be good, but I think that we have a diamond in the rough here. He is one of those players that you notice is on the ice.
Originally posted by Bingo+Jul 30 2004, 02:37 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Bingo @ Jul 30 2004, 02:37 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-theikon@Jul 30 2004, 08:28 AM I dont buy for one minute that the Flames owners don't have money.
Oil is $43/barrel.
Amazing to me to see fans still putting up comments like that.
That is why hockey is in such a huge mess right now ... people not keeping an eye on the bottom line.
The Flames as a business with x number of owners can maintain a payroll level of roughly 35 million. To go beyond that would be to lose money and drive player salaries up across the league (or repeat the offences of the recent past).
Being successful in other walks of life doesn't mean you have to get hammered in hockey.
This way of thinking has to stop. [/b][/quote]
The Flames are close to break even/making a profit and responsible financially already. If they bring in 1 guy at an Extra $4.0million lets say. I am sure the additional revenue that winning and succeeding would far out pace the cost of such a player over an 82 game schedule and playoff run. You would only need 1300 extra season tickets at $75 to cover it.
They could cover 1 guy and still be fiscally responsible and turn a profit/break even.
Again Johnny those are the type of mistakes that are killing this league.
You cannot say for sure that by bringing in a high priced centre that:
a) It would mean extra wins or
B) It would mean extra revenue
Its simply not a risk a team like the Flames can make.
Moreover, what would be the cost in terms of player and assets to bring in a player like you are talking about? Dramatic I think. So you are wanting to entirely break up a team that made it to the SCF last year? Why?
Originally posted by BigRed@Jul 30 2004, 01:50 PM No insult intended to Reinprecht or Conroy, but think about it: Iginla has managed to emerge as a dominant player without ever in his career playign with a front line, playmaking centre. Just imagine what his numbers would look like playing with Sakic, Forsberg, Thornton, etc.
Just a thought, but I think the Flames owe it to their fans, to Iginla, and, frankly, to history to pull out all the stops and do whatever it takes to acquire that #1 guy. Anything short of Regehr, Kipper and Iginla himself, in a trade, would be all right by me. Iggy has abotu 6 productive years left; the right C could make them historic ones, IMO.
Well we aren't going to get Thornton, Sakic, Forsberg, etc.
But in my opinion Steve Reinprecht is one the most purely skilled centres the Flames have had in the past decade and I think you'll see Iggy do well with him. I think he has top line calibre skill. He's a big upgrade in terms of skill over Craig Conroy.
Originally posted by JiriHrdina@Jul 30 2004, 02:50 PM Again Johnny those are the type of mistakes that are killing this league.
You cannot say for sure that by bringing in a high priced centre that:
a) It would mean extra wins or
B) It would mean extra revenue
Its simply not a risk a team like the Flames can make.
Moreover, what would be the cost in terms of player and assets to bring in a player like you are talking about? Dramatic I think. So you are wanting to entirely break up a team that made it to the SCF last year? Why?
Why would you break up the team? You lost your #1 centre and he needs to be replaced? A player does not need to be traded, there are other ways to acquire players allaFree Agents draft picks etc.
Why did they Flames win the cup in '89? because they had a higher payroll and brought in talent and pieces the preceeding years.
If you don't sell the game and players and you are not winning why would a fan go to a game? You need to spend money to make money. Within reason of course.
You owe it to your fans to do what it takes to put a team on the ice that will win. If you do that they will come.
Originally posted by Bingo@Jul 30 2004, 02:37 PM <!--QuoteBegin-theikon
Quote:
@Jul 30 2004, 08:28 AM I dont buy for one minute that the Flames owners don't have money.
Oil is $43/barrel.
Amazing to me to see fans still putting up comments like that.
That is why hockey is in such a huge mess right now ... people not keeping an eye on the bottom line.
The Flames as a business with x number of owners can maintain a payroll level of roughly 35 million. To go beyond that would be to lose money and drive player salaries up across the league (or repeat the offences of the recent past).
Being successful in other walks of life doesn't mean you have to get hammered in hockey.
This way of thinking has to stop.
The Flames are close to break even/making a profit and responsible financially already. If they bring in 1 guy at an Extra $4.0million lets say. I am sure the additional revenue that winning and succeeding would far out pace the cost of such a player over an 82 game schedule and playoff run. You would only need 1300 extra season tickets at $75 to cover it.
They could cover 1 guy and still be fiscally responsible and turn a profit/break even. [/b][/quote]
The additional revenue of winning and succeeding? What, more success than every possible home game in a season? Every round of the playoffs or one goal away from the cup? They had success and still didn't pull in New York Ranger profits and aren't expected to. That's why they have a budget, so that with minimal success they might get a little profit. I'm glad they're being responsible, partly to stick it to the NHLPA, partly because it will make the team viable long term and partly cause there's no proof that will work.
I would like another centre or scorring forward though, but it'll have to be for say, Lydman and a pic or something, as stated above.
__________________
Canuck insulter and proud of it.
Reason:
-------
Insulted Other Member(s)
Don't insult other members; even if they are Canuck fans.
Originally posted by JohnnyO+Jul 30 2004, 08:58 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (JohnnyO @ Jul 30 2004, 08:58 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-JiriHrdina@Jul 30 2004, 02:50 PM Again Johnny those are the type of mistakes that are killing this league.
You cannot say for sure that by bringing in a high priced centre that:
a) It would mean extra wins or
B) It would mean extra revenue
Its simply not a risk a team like the Flames can make.
Moreover, what would be the cost in terms of player and assets to bring in a player like you are talking about? Dramatic I think. So you are wanting to entirely break up a team that made it to the SCF last year? Why?
Why would you break up the team? You lost your #1 centre and he needs to be replaced? A player does not need to be traded, there are other ways to acquire players allaFree Agents draft picks etc.
Why did they Flames win the cup in '89? because they had a higher payroll and brought in talent and pieces the preceeding years.
If you don't sell the game and players and you are not winning why would a fan go to a game? You need to spend money to make money. Within reason of course.
You owe it to your fans to do what it takes to put a team on the ice that will win. If you do that they will come. [/b][/quote]
But your missing the big picture here.
As a Flames fan I'd love to see more talent brought in, but by doing so they add to a league wide problem of not making good business decisions. That drives up player salaries.
You just casually lost the team 4 million bucks and acted like it was no big deal.
If every team in the league purposely lost an additional 4 million bucks that would be 120,000,000 in additional player salaries which works out to a bump of 175,000 to the average salary in the league.
Originally posted by JohnnyO+Jul 30 2004, 08:58 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (JohnnyO @ Jul 30 2004, 08:58 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-JiriHrdina@Jul 30 2004, 02:50 PM Again Johnny those are the type of mistakes that are killing this league.
You cannot say for sure that by bringing in a high priced centre that:
a) It would mean extra wins or
B) It would mean extra revenue
Its simply not a risk a team like the Flames can make.
Moreover, what would be the cost in terms of player and assets to bring in a player like you are talking about? Dramatic I think. So you are wanting to entirely break up a team that made it to the SCF last year? Why?
Why would you break up the team? You lost your #1 centre and he needs to be replaced? A player does not need to be traded, there are other ways to acquire players allaFree Agents draft picks etc.
Why did they Flames win the cup in '89? because they had a higher payroll and brought in talent and pieces the preceeding years.
If you don't sell the game and players and you are not winning why would a fan go to a game? You need to spend money to make money. Within reason of course.
You owe it to your fans to do what it takes to put a team on the ice that will win. If you do that they will come. [/b][/quote]
First. What the fans are owed is a team that is managed properly and an organization that can have some long-term stability. The only way that will be done is by icing a competitive hockey team AND being profitable. One cannot take priority over the other otherwise we are hooped
Two. So what kind of centre are we talking about. Your initial post suggested a true #1 centre was what you were looking for. Right now that type of person isn't really available via FA.
Peter Nedved? Not an option - his hot wife doesn't want to be in Alberta. He's more of a #2 and not an upgrade over Rhino IMO
Stumpel? Allison? Who else?
Doesn't seem to me that without trading a significant asset that there is a "true #1 centre" out there that can just be signed.
A #1 centre is one of the hardest assets to find out there right now. Everyteam wants one, few have one. You think you can package draft picks and prospects to get one via a trade? You are mistaken I'm afraid unless you are talking about trading Dion Phaneuf.
Originally posted by JohnnyO@Jul 30 2004, 08:58 AM <!--QuoteBegin-JiriHrdina
Quote:
@Jul 30 2004, 02:50 PM Again Johnny those are the type of mistakes that are killing this league.
You cannot say for sure that by bringing in a high priced centre that:
a) It would mean extra wins or
B) It would mean extra revenue
Its simply not a risk a team like the Flames can make.
Moreover, what would be the cost in terms of player and assets to bring in a player like you are talking about? Dramatic I think. So you are wanting to entirely break up a team that made it to the SCF last year? Why?
Why would you break up the team? You lost your #1 centre and he needs to be replaced? A player does not need to be traded, there are other ways to acquire players allaFree Agents draft picks etc.
Why did they Flames win the cup in '89? because they had a higher payroll and brought in talent and pieces the preceeding years.
If you don't sell the game and players and you are not winning why would a fan go to a game? You need to spend money to make money. Within reason of course.
You owe it to your fans to do what it takes to put a team on the ice that will win. If you do that they will come.
But your missing the big picture here.
As a Flames fan I'd love to see more talent brought in, but by doing so they add to a league wide problem of not making good business decisions. That drives up player salaries.
You just casually lost the team 4 million bucks and acted like it was no big deal.
If every team in the league purposely lost an additional 4 million bucks that would be 120,000,000 in additional player salaries which works out to a bump of 175,000 to the average salary in the league.
This way of thinking has to stop. [/b][/quote]
Why Does everyone assume that they would lose money?
What if they don't? The Flames finally made money last year, why was that ? Because the had a winning team and playoff success. You need talent to succeed, talent and success brings in fans. What if they fill the dome for all 41 home games? Would they still lose money? Nope!!
Over paying for players like the Leafs, Blues, NYR and Kings is the problem, teams like the Flames trying to compete is not the problem.
I'd like to have an All-Star center next to Iginla. Who wouldn't? The problem, though, is that we would have to get rid of so much depth. We barely had enough to get to the point we did this past season. What would happen if we had to trade, say Lydman, a third liner like Clark, and a pick. Then the guy gets injured like Reinprecht. Add in the salary issues, that Bingo mentioned, then it's not likely unless someone comes through the organization, hopefully like Lombardi.
Originally posted by JohnnyO@Jul 30 2004, 08:58 AM <!--QuoteBegin-JiriHrdina
Quote:
Quote:
@Jul 30 2004, 02:50 PM Again Johnny those are the type of mistakes that are killing this league.
You cannot say for sure that by bringing in a high priced centre that:
a) It would mean extra wins or
B) It would mean extra revenue
Its simply not a risk a team like the Flames can make.
Moreover, what would be the cost in terms of player and assets to bring in a player like you are talking about? Dramatic I think. So you are wanting to entirely break up a team that made it to the SCF last year? Why?
Why would you break up the team? You lost your #1 centre and he needs to be replaced? A player does not need to be traded, there are other ways to acquire players allaFree Agents draft picks etc.
Why did they Flames win the cup in '89? because they had a higher payroll and brought in talent and pieces the preceeding years.
If you don't sell the game and players and you are not winning why would a fan go to a game? You need to spend money to make money. Within reason of course.
You owe it to your fans to do what it takes to put a team on the ice that will win. If you do that they will come.
But your missing the big picture here.
As a Flames fan I'd love to see more talent brought in, but by doing so they add to a league wide problem of not making good business decisions. That drives up player salaries.
You just casually lost the team 4 million bucks and acted like it was no big deal.
If every team in the league purposely lost an additional 4 million bucks that would be 120,000,000 in additional player salaries which works out to a bump of 175,000 to the average salary in the league.
This way of thinking has to stop.
Why Does everyone assume that they would lose money?
What if they don't? The Flames finally made money last year, why was that ? Because the had a winning team and playoff success. You need talent to succeed, talent and success brings in fans. What if they fill the dome for all 41 home games? Would they still lose money? Nope!!
Over paying for players like the Leafs, Blues, NYR and Kings is the problem, teams like the Flames trying to compete is not the problem. [/b][/quote]
Well ...
They reportedly lost 35 million over 7 years, they may not be in a hurry to turn a significantly smaller windfall from one playoff run into player salaries.
The Flames opened their books to the players a year ago ... the players in Calgary at that time didn't doubt the Flames economic system, which to me dictates that they would in fact lose about 4 million to their bottom line if they added a 4 million dollar player.
Do that and you add to the problem, which you can't do in a system where you're one of the first to suggest said problem needs to be fixed.
people keep mentioning how much money the flames made in the playoffs last year and they should spend the money and increase payroll.. they had what 12 playoff games, now if you look over the 8 year period, 7 when they didnt make the playoffs and last year. that is the equivalant of 1.5 home playoff games a year. still well below the better teams. it would be nice to get a front line center but as the flames proved last year, good goaltending and heart can beat anybody.. more payrol is not the answer always, look at the ranger, stars, and the Maple Laffs.... i also agree, what does the price of oil have to do with anything??? does that mean every player should get a 50% raise?? has nothing to do with hockey operations
hope its another 37 years before the leafs win the cup by the way
Originally posted by JohnnyO@Jul 30 2004, 03:32 PM They Flames lost money the last seven years because they sucked and did not make the playoffs.
The Flames will make money if they put a winning team on the Ice.
Do It!! (Alla Starsky)
Is it seriously that hard to understand that Darryl Sutter has a budget to work with? I can't believe so many people blindly believe we should just throw that out the window and spend, spend, spend. It's EXACTLY why the league is having so many problems.
Sure, we'd all love to acquire another premiere player but use you head and some logic...
Originally posted by dirk diggler@Jul 30 2004, 03:37 PM people keep mentioning how much money the flames made in the playoffs last year and they should spend the money and increase payroll.. they had what 12 playoff games, now if you look over the 8 year period, 7 when they didnt make the playoffs and last year. that is the equivalant of 1.5 home playoff games a year. still well below the better teams. it would be nice to get a front line center but as the flames proved last year, good goaltending and heart can beat anybody.. more payrol is not the answer always, look at the ranger, stars, and the Maple Laffs.... i also agree, what does the price of oil have to do with anything??? does that mean every player should get a 50% raise?? has nothing to do with hockey operations
hope its another 37 years before the leafs win the cup by the way
Do you really think the flames can play 82 games like they did in the playoffs?
