[Trade] Flames acquire G Brian Elliott for 35th OA & conditional 2018 3rd

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Plus, Gaudreau and Monahan will have contracts for this year. Next year is unchanged for them, and there is tons of room for an extension for Elliot.

Tons? Debateable. What if Sam Bennett explodes for 70 points in his contract year while Ferland finally goes off for 20 goals? Unlikely, but very possible.

Most prudent would be to wait until ~December to see how things are shaping up.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Tons? Debateable. What if Sam Bennett explodes for 70 points in his contract year while Ferland finally goes off for 20 goals? Unlikely, but very possible.

Then you deal with it when it comes, quite possibly by trading Ferland for a big return. You don't budget in advance for incredible strokes of luck.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Then you deal with it when it comes, quite possibly by trading Ferland for a big return. You don't budget in advance for incredible strokes of luck.

If Ferland scores 20 goals next year and is promptly traded, I will personally fly to Calgary and punch Brad Treliving in the face.

[thymebalm]

Is the general thought that they will just offer him 5x5 immediately come July 1 as a contract extension?

What is the risk of waiting until January to offer him a deal?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by thymebalm

Is the general thought that they will just offer him 5x5 immediately come July 1 as a contract extension?

What is the risk of waiting until January to offer him a deal?

The risk is that he plays so well he wants more than 5x5. Seems more like a good thing than a risk to me.

I think they'll wait for sure.

The fact of the matter is that they really don't know for certain what they have in Elliot until he plays some games for the team.

They also don't really know what they have with Ortio. Or with Gillies. Or with Riddich. Or with McDonald.

So why not wait and see how the season plays out and how they all progress. Because once they know more about each of these guys, they'll be in a better position to make more permanent plans.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

If Ferland scores 20 goals next year and is promptly traded, I will personally fly to Calgary and punch Brad Treliving in the face.

And if Ferland then gets $4 million a year from his new team and the Flames wind up with a first-round pick on the deal, will you then plead guilty to assault?

If a GM deserved a punch in the face every time he traded a player for cap reasons, Stan Bowman would have no face left. But he'd still have three Stanley Cup rings.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

If Ferland scores 20 goals next year and is promptly traded, I will personally fly to Calgary and punch Brad Treliving in the face.

Colborne scored 20ish and you support him letting him walk way with no return. Treliving needs to take care of the top 6 core. The rest have to fit or be replaced with a cheaper guy.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

And if Ferland then gets $4 million a year from his new team and the Flames wind up with a first-round pick on the deal, will you then plead guilty to assault?

If a GM deserved a punch in the face every time he traded a player for cap reasons, Stan Bowman would have no face left. But he'd still have three Stanley Cup rings.

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Colborne scored 20ish and you support him letting him walk way with no return. Treliving needs to take care of the top 6 core. The rest have to fit or be replaced with a cheaper guy.

I like Ferland more than Colborne, I guess is what it comes down to. If, in hypothetical land, Ferland put up almost half of his points in the last quarter, I would be just as skeptical as I am with Joe.... but I wasn't really thinking of it that deeply when I wrote what I did.

Had Colborne put up a consistent 44 point year, my tune would be different. What I saw was a player who was mostly ineffective for 2.5 seasons suddenly turn into Jamie Benn production-wise of 1/4 of a season when the Flames were out of it and the pressure was off. I'm just not convinced. But it is hard for me to compare that to Ferland's would-be 20 goal season when I already like him better.

Besides, I don't think Ferland gets $4m as an RFA, even after after a 20 goal year, not after his disappointing (production-wise) 15/16. He is younger than Colborne, and doesn't have the same past production to warrant a big deal in that situation IMO... but I still like him as a player more.

To be crystal clear... I would be perfectly fine giving Colborne 3 x3m were it not for our collection of bad contracts. I just feel signing him to a deal like that is too risky given that. We should be consolidating cap space, not spreading it out on depth players.

[bigrangy]

There is no hurry at all the resign Elliot. There will be enough available goalies as the year goes on that could replace him, either via FA or trade. Way too risky to sign a goalie long term when he hasn't even been a starter in his career.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Colborne scored 20ish and you support him letting him walk way with no return. Treliving needs to take care of the top 6 core. The rest have to fit or be replaced with a cheaper guy.

Ferland is a much better "detail" player than Colborne - forecheck, board battles, neutral zone pressure, D-zone stickwork, and of course what he's known for - hitting like a truck.

If their production were even within 30% of each other I take Ferland all day every day. Point being, we should wait and see how Elliott, Bennett, Ferland perform going into next season before allocating cap space into Elliott alone. It may be that Gillies is blatantly NHL ready by January. Then what?

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by bigrangy

There is no hurry at all the resign Elliot. There will be enough available goalies as the year goes on that could replace him, either via FA or trade. Way too risky to sign a goalie long term when he hasn't even been a starter in his career.

It depends what he wants. If you can get him signed to a similar deal to what Talbot signed, you do it without hesitation. If he wants 5m+ on 4+ years we should probably test drive him a bit first.

[Vinny01]

No way should the Flames sign Elliot until after the trade deadline IMO. One of the best parts of acquiring him at such a cheap cost is the Flames have all kinds of flexibility. If Pitt is screwed at the deadline because their goaltending tandem both look so solid then Fleury for Elliot gets done with ease (depending on how many teams need goalies) the Flames could even get additional assets.

Elliot is a good starter to go into the season with but he is also a good trade chip to swap with another team that has 2 very good goalies come the deadline

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

No way should the Flames sign Elliot until after the trade deadline IMO. One of the best parts of acquiring him at such a cheap cost is the Flames have all kinds of flexibility. If Pitt is screwed at the deadline because their goaltending tandem both look so solid then Fleury for Elliot gets done with ease (depending on how many teams need goalies) the Flames could even get additional assets.

Elliot is a good starter to go into the season with but he is also a good trade chip to swap with another team that has 2 very good goalies come the deadline

This. You just gained all this flexibility by making a solid trade. Let's see how he does behind this team before committing to him as the long term starter. Frankly if he plays lights out, he might be even more valuable as a trade chip at the deadline. That low salary number really increases his value.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by squiggs96

No. We don't need the Dome to sound like canucks fans during the 7uongo years.

LMAO.

Obviously you're too young to remember fans chanting "Loooooob" back in the day.

Besides which, I chant "Luuuuuu" now and it's great. Who cares what happened years ago? Isn't it good to have some atmosphere in your home building?

Geez, what a stick in the mud.

Edit: sorry for the old post bump.

[sureLoss]

http://www.todaysslapshot.com/from-t...ficantly-high/

“And the price for Ben Bishop has to be significantly high, in terms of the quality of maybe the young prospect that you’re going to have to give up, or the draft picks that you’re going to have to give up. He’s still under contract for this year. And then on top of that, of course, is how do you lure him away from unrestricted free agency.

“I think that combination was a lethal one for the Calgary Flames at the draft. Calgary would have preferred to acquire Ben Bishop. That’s just fact. I mean, Brian Elliott is a good goaltender, but Ben Bishop is better. Treliving just didn’t want to pay the asking price, and was terrified that he was probably staring at a seven-year term at better than $6 million per to extend contract, and that was too much, all-in.”

[CroFlames]

Ben Bishop is simply not worth 7 x 6million at 30 years old. That's just fact.

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

If Ferland scores 20 goals next year and is promptly traded, I will personally fly to Calgary and punch Brad Treliving in the face.

Signature worthy post.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Ben Bishop is simply not worth 7 x 6million at 30 years old. That's just fact.

I haven't thought too much about it but isn't goalie the one position you are relatively confident can play well deep into their 30's?

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Ben Bishop is simply not worth 7 x 6million at 30 years old. That's just fact.

Guy is a top 3 goalie in the league...if he's not worth it, then you're saying no one is.

I disagree with your assessment.

[Coach]

Many would disagree that Bishop is a top 3 goaltender.