Post Yandle Trade: What is Wideman's Value with 50% retained? - Page 2 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Badgers Nose · 03-01-2015, 06:17 PM

As I predicted before the season, Wideman is earning his contract this year. IMO someone would have to overpay to obtain him.

CSharp · 03-01-2015, 08:49 PM

Well, if Wideman remains with Calgary through next season, you'll know that he'll be performing even better since that's his contract year. Maybe he'll be worth a lot more next year. But if the Flames can unload him now and get some more draft picks for the upcoming draft for this year and next, the rebuild will looks pretty sweet.

Da_Chief · 03-02-2015, 12:59 AM

The returns top 4 dman are getting are huge. I really wish/hope Treiliving and Co. consider moving Wideman. Longterm outlook.

Even just a first would be a helluva return.

robbie111 · 03-02-2015, 01:09 AM

Coburn is 30 years old has 9 pts this year and is a -1 on a 4.5 million dollar contract. Gets a 1st, 3rd and 24 year old defenseman who is getting knee surgery.

Wideman is 31 years old has 37 pts this year and is a -5 on a 5 million dollar contract.

With those prices, how about a 1st this year and 1st from next year and 10% ownership in the team that picks him up. lol.

N-E-B · 03-02-2015, 01:12 AM

I understand why people want to trade Wideman, these returns are ridiculous (and I may have been wrong with my earlier posts saying Wideman wouldn't get this type of return), but I just don't see it happening, especially with the injury to Giordano.

The Flames are also in the market to acquire a d-man, not sell one.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I wouldn't be getting my hopes up for a Wideman trade.

Jay Random · 03-02-2015, 01:15 AM

The problem with trading Wideman is that somebody has to play his minutes. And it can't just be anybody: the Flames' whole system, and their success this year, is based on getting key offensive contributions from all of their top 4 defencemen. Nobody in the system right now can take over his role.

So after selling Wideman at a high price in a seller's market, you have to go right back into that seller's market and buy a replacement – or else write off the year, and watch all your forwards score less because they aren't getting the same help from the blue line.

killer_carlson · 03-02-2015, 01:21 AM

I guess my willingness to sell Wideman is because I think we're selling at an absolute premium and that I think the season is done because of the Giordano injury and not replacing our #2 LW.

i'd be ok with hitting a home run right now on it. I'd also be ok with waiting until the draft to do the same thing in case we pull out a miracle and make the playoffs.

robbie111 · 03-02-2015, 01:23 AM

I've actually been really happy with Wideman this year and think we should keep him, but you've got to think other teams are going to come calling for him.

Just hope we are not dumb enough to overpay other teams this deadline to acquire a player. I'd be happy to stand pat. If we were offered something stupid like two 1sts (2015 and 2016) for Wideman though that would be hard to pass up.

MrMastodonFarm · 03-02-2015, 01:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

I guess my willingness to sell Wideman is because I think we're selling at an absolute premium and that I think the season is done because of the Giordano injury and not replacing our #2 LW.

i'd be ok with hitting a home run right now on it. I'd also be ok with waiting until the draft to do the same thing in case we pull out a miracle and make the playoffs.

#3 LW.
Pretty obvious it was Gaudreau, Bouma then Glencross. Bouma raising his game is what made moving Glencross with no immediate return much easier to take.

Mister Yamoto · 03-02-2015, 01:50 AM

Totally OK with trading Wideman. He was scoring goals last fall but has since gone back to what he always was. A guy who gets you a goal a month and doesn't do much else. I'd like to know how many GWG against he has blown a tire on since he got here.

Don't like the idea of retaining salary though. If the Flames are going to be at the bottom of the league in terms of payroll, 100% of those dollars should be for players who play for the Flames. Let whoever gets Wideman pay Wideman.

crapshoot · 03-02-2015, 06:15 AM

I hope they keep Wideman, and I hope they re-sign him after his current contract too. The way he plays he can be quite effective in a bottom pairing role for many years to come.

Harry Lime · 03-02-2015, 06:29 AM

Is Detroit the only conceivable landing spot left for a D of Wideman's calibre? Who exactly would you be asking for? Mantha straight up?

Crumpy-Gunt · 03-02-2015, 06:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

Is Detroit the only conceivable landing spot left for a D of Wideman's calibre? Who exactly would you be asking for? Mantha straight up?

Hell yes. Im a huge mantha fan. Watched him in the Q. First season back after an injury now but he will be a star in the NHL. I'd do that in a heartbeat. In a year or two it would look like the predators and capitals trade that sent filip forsberg to nashville for martin erat. I'd even add a 2nd / 3rd AND retain salary to get that deal done. Just based on how Mantha projects, size, speed, amazing scoring touch, numbers in junior, positional need for us.

Would be a home run trade for us. I'd have a mantha jersey stitched before the end of the week.

[/fanboy]

Resolute 14 · 03-02-2015, 08:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by logan_izer10

Don't understand why everyone wants Wideman gone. He's an offensive threat and is quite serviceable defensively. Just don't get it, I like the guy.

Because he's over the age of 22 and apparently we don't need defence.

CliffFletcher · 03-02-2015, 08:37 AM

Rebuilding teams routinely move out guys like Wideman for picks and prospects. Doesn't mean he isn't a good player. You have to give up quality to get quality, and it makes sense to sell high.