[News] Preds fire Laviolette. John Hynes named HC

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by BrennyBaller

While this is true, a lot of NTC's include all 7 Canadian cities due to taxes

Funny but I checked out Gavin Group (former player and current financial advisor) who has a wonderful calculator for players taxes. Straight up Calgary/Edmonton are better than 11 other cities, including all the NY and Cali teams for taxes. When they factor in the taxes they pay in the other NHL cities for days the team spends playing there, the Alberta teams are better than 14 teams, so middle of the road.

The tax fallacy has been disproven numerous times. The 4 worst are Montreal, Toronto, Ottawa and Vancouver. Some pretty popular FA teams on that list.

[Aleks]

I would think that coaches, like players, are competitive individuals as well and are very motivated by success. Yeah, there are a bunch of outliers, selfish type of players and coaches who will choose based on location. Those are the ones coasting through their career. I think if you want the best chance to win, you choose the location that has the best chance to win. You can always have your beach house or whatever for the rest of your life. Its not like a coach is going to be here in 6 years.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by CSharp

I like to see Laviolette get hired as the next Flames head coach. But at the same time, if he is hired, I wonder how long it will take for this current roster to have him fired.

I think that Laviolette would be a long term hire where he gets to run the show and if players aren't fitting in they get shipped out. At this point it shouldn't be players getting coaches fired but rather the other way around. Let Laviolette build the team.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Beatle17

Funny but I checked out Gavin Group (former player and current financial advisor) who has a wonderful calculator for players taxes. Straight up Calgary/Edmonton are better than 11 other cities, including all the NY and Cali teams for taxes. When they factor in the taxes they pay in the other NHL cities for days the team spends playing there, the Alberta teams are better than 14 teams, so middle of the road.

The tax fallacy has been disproven numerous times. The 4 worst are Montreal, Toronto, Ottawa and Vancouver. Some pretty popular FA teams on that list.

It's not a fallacy vis-a-vis teams from Fla, Texas, Nevada, Arizona or Tennessee.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Beatle17

Name the realistic goalies he could have picked up and list the coaches that he didn't contact? You are pretty sure in your comment so I assume that you have inside information that could help the rest of us.

I'm a Treliving supporter, but his last coaching hire was pretty famously based on no other interviews. He met Peters, liked him and went with him. When GG was hired, he interviewed a few (including Ward, who almost got the job).

Goalies - you hear different stories but MAF and Bishop were apparently almost Flames. That said, Gillies and Parson were supposed to be blue chippers so he was justified in not throwing a lot to land an aging star goalie (and Bishop came with troubling injury history).

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I'm a Treliving supporter, but his last coaching hire was pretty famously based on no other interviews. He met Peters, liked him and went with him. When GG was hired, he interviewed a few (including Ward, who almost got the job).

Goalies - you hear different stories but MAF and Bishop were apparently almost Flames. That said, Gillies and Parson were supposed to be blue chippers so he was justified in not throwing a lot to land an aging star goalie (and Bishop came with troubling injury history).

More goalies who have been available at different times: Markstrom, Lehner...

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

More goalies who have been available at different times: Markstrom, Lehner...

Yeah but at the time Lehner would have been just as big a guess as goalies he signed. Lehner was just a backup and I considered average in Ottawa and Buffalo. Not sure where you get Markstrom from - he's been a Canuck since 13-14. I never heard he was for sale.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

It's not a fallacy vis-a-vis teams from Fla, Texas, Nevada, Arizona or Tennessee.

Yes, but, like Aleks said, most players and coaches want to win. And they want a spot that works well for them - the right opportunity.

I think that the climate/location is secondary for most, after winning/best fit. And there are only 31 NHL coaching jobs, so not everyone gets to go to Florida. So the fact that Calgary sits about in the middle of the pack for taxes means that, for most situations, it probably isn't a negative or a significant factor.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Yes, but, like Aleks said, most players and coaches want to win. And they want a spot that works well for them - the right opportunity.

I think that the climate/location is secondary for most, after winning/best fit. And there are only 31 NHL coaching jobs, so not everyone gets to go to Florida. So the fact that Calgary sits about in the middle of the pack for taxes means that, for most situations, it probably isn't a negative or a significant factor.

I agree - they want to win. Calgary is a good opportunity (and better than Dallas or SJ). But money isn't to be sneezed at, especially when your career can be shortened a lot. Dallas has an advantage there.

Dallas might be tempted to throw open the vault for a fast signing because they certainly need to win now. Benn, Joe P., Perry, Bishop, Khudobin, Radulov are all 30+. They aren't a horrible team as they stand right now, they just have a smaller window. They still have Heiskenan, Seguin, Hintz, Klingberg under 30 too.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Yeah but at the time Lehner would have been just as big a guess as goalies he signed. Lehner was just a backup and I considered average in Ottawa and Buffalo. Not sure where you get Markstrom from - he's been a Canuck since 13-14. I never heard he was for sale.

i remember lots of rumblings when Demko was performing well in Utica.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Aleks

I would think that coaches, like players, are competitive individuals as well and are very motivated by success. Yeah, there are a bunch of outliers, selfish type of players and coaches who will choose based on location. Those are the ones coasting through their career.

I think this is a fairly binary and clichéd perspective of things.

It's pretty clear from this that "success" is defined as a virtue, and is one directly tied only to championships and winning. You contrast this virtue with "selfish types" who "choose based on location" and "coast through their career"—as if all of these adjectives are actually describing the same thing. What about "success" in life? In relationships? In health and well-being? Why is it inherently selfish to live where one is most happy and fulfilled at the expense of professional advancement?

I think if you want the best chance to win, you choose the location that has the best chance to win. You can always have your beach house or whatever for the rest of your life. Its not like a coach is going to be here in 6 years.

Right, but again, this also presumes a whole lot about the extended value of "winning." Winning at what cost? Is it palatable enough to pursue a championship, two championships, multiple championships if it results in short term or extended misery? What if it costs one's health and well-being? One's relationships? One's emotional or psychological stability?

I am not saying you are wrong: certainly, the best chance to win for a NHL coach will be with the team that projects most likely to be a winner. My objection is with projection of competing priorities in terms of virtues. If Laviolette ultimately chooses comfort or emotional, relational peace over the chance to win, this does not make him inherently selfish. On the contrary, this could be the most selfless choice he ever makes.

...or he could simply decide to leave hockey altogether, and this wouldn't on its own make him a ego-driven leech.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

i remember lots of rumblings when Demko was performing well in Utica.

That's pretty thin stuff though. Even with that, they would have kept Markstrom, who's never been out of RFA status when the question would have arisen, and who was cheap.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

i remember lots of rumblings when Demko was performing well in Utica.

Would that have been 2017–18?

At the time Jacob Markstrom was in the first year of his current three-year $3.6 m deal. He had just come off of a fairly pedestrian performance as a backup: having played in 25 games and posted a solid but unspectacular 2.63 GAA and a 0.910 SP. He turned 28-years-old that season, and was playing his first year as a starter, which he finished with 23 wins in 60 GP, a 0.911 SP, 2.71 GAA and 2 SO.

He was a year older than Rittich is now, and recorded comparable, but likely worse numbers to what Rittich will probably turn in this year: on pace for 61 starts, 33 wins, a 0.911 SP, 2.81 GAA and 4 SO.

It seems a pretty good bet that Rittich is tracking well to become at least what Markstrom is today, if not better.

[SportsJunky]

Hit em with the Hein!

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Would that have been 2017–18?

At the time Jacob Markstrom was in the first year of his current three-year $3.6 m deal. He had just come off of a fairly pedestrian performance as a backup: having played in 25 games and posted a solid but unspectacular 2.63 GAA and a 0.910 SP. He turned 28-years-old that season, and was playing his first year as a starter, which he finished with 23 wins in 60 GP, a 0.911 SP, 2.71 GAA and 2 SO.

He was a year older than Rittich is now, and recorded comparable, but likely worse numbers to what Rittich will probably turn in this year: on pace for 61 starts, 33 wins, a 0.911 SP, 2.81 GAA and 4 SO.

It seems a pretty good bet that Rittich is tracking well to become at least what Markstrom is today, if not better.

Perhaps so! I am not down on Rittich at all and still think he has great potential. We have had opportunities to snag other goalies though.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Perhaps so! I am not down on Rittich at all and still think he has great potential. We have had opportunities to snag other goalies though.

Right, and this is not the first time it has been mentioned on this site. However, I will respond as I frequently do by pointing out that acquiring one of the other rumoured-to-be-available goaltenders at the time of movement would have in each instance cost the Flames another valuable player or asset. Had Treliving opted to go all-in on a player like Bishop, Lehner or Fleury it would have also resulted in losing a player like Tkachuk, Lindholm, or Hanifin.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Right, and this is not the first time it has been mentioned on this site. However, I will respond as I frequently do by pointing out that acquiring one of the other rumoured-to-be-available goaltenders at the time of movement would have in each instance cost the Flames another valuable player or asset. Had Treliving opted to go all-in on a player like Bishop, Lehner or Fleury it would have also resulted in losing a player like Tkachuk, Lindholm, or Hanifin.

Given Lehner was an FA twice, it should not have cost us assets to acquire him, though we would have had to shed some salary elsewhere.
I agree though, and am not criticizing Tre on sticking to Rittich. To say proven/ other Goalies weren't available to trade for is just not true.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Right, and this is not the first time it has been mentioned on this site. However, I will respond as I frequently do by pointing out that acquiring one of the other rumoured-to-be-available goaltenders at the time of movement would have in each instance cost the Flames another valuable player or asset. Had Treliving opted to go all-in on a player like Bishop, Lehner or Fleury it would have also resulted in losing a player like Tkachuk, Lindholm, or Hanifin.

Or Hamonic maybe? The draft picks were there to be spent at different times.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Or Hamonic maybe? The draft picks were there to be spent at different times.

Yes. The point is that it was never just as simple as adding one of those players to the roster.

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Given Lehner was an FA twice, it should not have cost us assets to acquire him, though we would have had to shed some salary elsewhere.

It was emphatically demonstrated this last summer that cap space is rather a very valuable asset. The Flames desperately attempted to shed some in an effort to get Tkachuk under contract long-term, and managed only to move out about a quarter million dollars in the Neal/Lucic deal. Theoretically they could have merely paid Lehner, but not would then have been impossible to sign Tkachuk to ANY plausible deal without a significant movement of more salary out.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Yes. The point is that it was never just as simple as adding one of those players to the roster.


It was emphatically demonstrated this last summer that cap space is rather a very valuable asset. The Flames desperately attempted to shed some in an effort to get Tkachuk under contract long-term, and managed only to move out about a quarter million dollars in the Neal/Lucic deal. Theoretically they could have merely paid Lehner, but not would then have been impossible to sign Tkachuk to ANY plausible deal without a significant movement of more salary out.

I think this is hogwash. We just proved last week that Frolik could be dumped. He wasn't during the off-season because we were looking for some value back/ thought he would be productive, but he could have if need be.