Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle
So bizzare how we insist on drawing conclusions that simply don't need to be made.
The only thing this pattern reflects is the situation Craig Conroy inherited as a GM (and I don't even mean that in a way of throwing shade at the previous GM either). A number of players, with contracts coming up on big pay days, who's age ranges post signing new deals don't exactly fit Calgary's circumstance for either player or team. We find ourselves in that situation year over year, because that's the situation we are in based on our contract situation, not because of anything Conny is or isn't doing as a GM.
Players like Anderson, seem to have all the control, because they do when it comes to signing another contract. Sign and trades are relatively new to the NHL, but Anderson is simply exercising his UFA status early, IF the Flames are wanting to try and leverage that to ENHANCE the value of the asset. Now it might be disappointing if Anderson's list is small, and essentially takes away or degrades the incremental value of the sign and trade market, but that is what it is, it has nothing to do with Conroy. Conroy can still do what he wants, outside of Anderson's NTC, and make a the highest value trade for a player that might just be a 1 year rental, or to a team willing to roll the dice on him changing his mind on extending.
I also guess, that when we hear Anderson is only willing to extend with Vegas, that it likely means only willing to extend with Vegas, among the the teams who expressed interest in him at this point in time via trade. That point may be irrelevant to the Flames, but I'd guess Anderson wouldn't only consider one location if he actually makes it to UFA.
Anyway, I'm not sure I get this players have the power under Conroy. The players do have the power, always, on whether they want to sign new contracts (except for RFA). We should judge Conroy on how he navigates the situations he's been given, not for some un-real expectation that he can wave a magic wand and change them. For what it's worth, I've been happy with his body of work the past year with some poor situations to deal with and feel he's done well maximizing value of the assets he's had to deal with.
I also think, if you want to critique the Anderson handling, likely the only thing one can point too at this moment in time, would be if maybe they should have moved him earlier, for the multi year value contract. But again, not sure what we want him to do re: Anderson's decisions on where or where he won't lock in for what is likely his last NHL contract.
|