[News] Friedman: Feaster/Flames are not going to blow it up

[The Coppernian One]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Basing this on what? Your gut feel? You may very well be right, but you are no more right than those who feel a top prospect could be had. Will all depend on the number of teams that actually are interested come deadline time.

On the goalie front, I think you are underestimating the market as well. For example, Chicago is playing very well, but how confident are they that Emery and Crawford actually can get it done? See some shaky goaltending from them over the next month and you could potentially see Chicago showing some interest in an established playoff performer in that position.

You have correctly identified that it is a debatable topic on this message board. So yes, I don't see a high end prospect coming back for a rental player which is an opinion I put out in response to another poster's differing opinion. Why the need to point out that I'm not more right than anyone else? Obviously none of us will know with certainty until it happens.

I also don't think I'm underestimating the goalie market at all, but that's my opinion. Right now I don't see Chicago to be in need of a goalie. If their goaltending tanks over the next month then sure, they may be in the market, but I still don't think they're going to give up a high end prospect for that help unless that goalie is long-term.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by nik-

That's terrible.

Not really. Bernier has been playing better than Quick this year and has franchise goaltender pedigree. If the Flames are going to go into a rebuild it's wise to ensure that the team has solid goaltending to avoid a plight like the Blue Jackets where their goaltending has been poor over the years. Unless they are really sold on Ramo (Feaster may be because of the connections but I don't know if everyone is) then they should at least explore an Iginla for Bernier swap.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by The Coppernian One

You have correctly identified that it is a debatable topic on this message board. So yes, I don't see a high end prospect coming back for a rental player which is an opinion I put out in response to another poster's differing opinion. Why the need to point out that I'm not more right than anyone else? Obviously none of us will know with certainty until it happens.

I also don't think I'm underestimating the goalie market at all, but that's my opinion. Right now I don't see Chicago to be in need of a goalie. If their goaltending tanks over the next month then sure, they may be in the market, but I still don't think they're going to give up a high end prospect for that help unless that goalie is long-term.

I feel the need to point it out because of your reasoning. You keep talking about "no one will give up a high end prospect for a rental" . It's like you've never seen the trade deadline before.

Fair, no one might give up a top prospect for either Kipper or Iggy this year, market demand might not allow the Flames to get such value. And it's not that teams won't be thinking about contract status when they make offers. But plenty of rentals have been traded for top prospects and good return in the past, but you make it sound like it's some massive barrier to a deal, and you make it sound like it's a fact. In today's cap world, an expiring contract can be viewed in many cases as a benefit versus the hinderence you are describing. Iggy likely has more value as a rental than he would if he had 2 more years at 7 million left on his contract, whether that would net the Flames a top prospect or not is another story.

[Stay Golden]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Not really. Bernier has been playing better than Quick this year and has franchise goaltender pedigree. If the Flames are going to go into a rebuild it's wise to ensure that the team has solid goaltending to avoid a plight like the Blue Jackets where their goaltending has been poor over the years. Unless they are really sold on Ramo (Feaster may be because of the connections but I don't know if everyone is) then they should at least explore an Iginla for Bernier swap.

It would have to include a the 1st round pick going to Calgary or no deal. BTW that LA pick might end up being the 30th pick

Personally i would like to see the Flames use the LA deal as leverage with PIT, BOS, PHI, MON or the other front runners. I think you get more back from any of them instead.

[bubbsy]

i thought the kings don't have a 1st rounder this year.

bernier + a 50th-60th overall pick?

[neo45]

Originally Posted by Stay Golden

It would have to include a the 1st round pick going to Calgary or no deal. BTW that LA pick might end up being the 30th pick

Personally i would like to see the Flames use the LA deal as leverage with PIT, BOS, PHI, MON or the other front runners. I think you get more back from any of them instead.

Does LA even have their 1st rounder? I thought it was in Columbus

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Stay Golden

It would have to include a the 1st round pick going to Calgary or no deal. BTW that LA pick might end up being the 30th pick

Personally i would like to see the Flames use the LA deal as leverage with PIT, BOS, PHI, MON or the other front runners. I think you get more back from any of them instead.

Yeah I agree that you have to play the game and pit teams up against one another in hopes of getting that homerun offer. I kind of hate all this talk though as for all we know it's not going to happen and a lot of people will be overly disappointed by getting their hopes up.

[The Coppernian One]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

I feel the need to point it out because of your reasoning. You keep talking about "no one will give up a high end prospect for a rental" . It's like you've never seen the trade deadline before.

Fair, no one might give up a top prospect for either Kipper or Iggy this year, market demand might not allow the Flames to get such value. And it's not that teams won't be thinking about contract status when they make offers. But plenty of rentals have been traded for top prospects and good return in the past, but you make it sound like it's some massive barrier to a deal, and you make it sound like it's a fact. In today's cap world, an expiring contract can be viewed in many cases as a benefit versus the hinderence you are describing. Iggy likely has more value as a rental than he would if he had 2 more years at 7 million left on his contract, whether that would net the Flames a top prospect or not is another story.

Alright, so we have a debate. What are your examples of top prospects traded at the deadline for pending UFAs? Let's start there.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

. But plenty of rentals have been traded for top prospects and good return in the past...

Examples?

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Examples?

Recently?

-Brendan Witt from the Capitals to Nashville for a prospect (Beech) and a first round pick.
-Ryan Smyth to the Islanders Robert Nillson (former first round pick) O'Marra(same) and a 1st rounder in 2007
-Bill Guerin to the Sharks for a 1st rounder
-Marian Hossa to the Penquins
-Brian Campbell from the Sabres to the Sharks for Bernier and a first rounder

[Stay Golden]

Originally Posted by neo45

Does LA even have their 1st rounder? I thought it was in Columbus

Then there is no way the Flames should even listen to this offer unless LA throws in Muzzin along with Bernier.

Sounds like Phanuef trade all over make a deal with a team that doesn't have a first.

[Stay Golden]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Recently?

-Brendan Witt from the Capitals to Nashville for a prospect (Beech) and a first round pick.
-Ryan Smyth to the Islanders Robert Nillson (former first round pick) O'Marra(same) and a 1st rounder in 2007
-Bill Guerin to the Sharks for a 1st rounder
-Marian Hossa to the Penquins
-Brian Campbell from the Sabres to the Sharks for Bernier and a first rounder

and Paul Gaustad to NSH for a 1st round pick

[Buff]

Originally Posted by neo45

Does LA even have their 1st rounder? I thought it was in Columbus

To compensate for the lack of a 1st, they should throw in Kopitar. Then the Flames would have the 1st line center to play with Iginla. Wait... what?

[StrykerSteve]

Originally Posted by neo45

I didn't. Why would a GM want 4 years of Tanguay at 3.5 with a NTC?

There is a legitimate chance that he would clear waivers at this point

He's leading the Flames in scoring this year, in today's NHL, I'd say 3.5 is a bargain.

[flamesrule_kipper34]

Originally Posted by neo45

I didn't. Why would a GM want 4 years of Tanguay at 3.5 with a NTC?

There is a legitimate chance that he would clear waivers at this point

Explain your reasoning behind thinking Tanguay could clear waivers?

You are crazy, absolutely crazy.

[Ped]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Recently?

-Brendan Witt from the Capitals to Nashville for a prospect (Beech) and a first round pick.
-Ryan Smyth to the Islanders Robert Nillson (former first round pick) O'Marra(same) and a 1st rounder in 2007
-Bill Guerin to the Sharks for a 1st rounder
-Marian Hossa to the Penquins
-Brian Campbell from the Sabres to the Sharks for Bernier and a first rounder

I don't know I'd be happy with Witt and Guerin as good examples.

The 1sts were late iirr. Beech was not a high end prospect. San Jose also gave up Jay Barriball ( a mediocre prospect) to get Guerin, and Guerin was having a better season than Iginla.

Also, 2 years later Guerin was traded for a 4th that turned into a 3rd.

Having said that, I'm sure Iginla can garner a good return. GMs give up more for less every deadline.

[EddyBeers]

Originally Posted by Stay Golden

Then there is no way the Flames should even listen to this offer unless LA throws in Muzzin along with Bernier.

Sounds like Phanuef trade all over make a deal with a team that doesn't have a first.

I sure hope Feaster is exploring his options at this point in time. I would agree that another pick should be thrown in on that Kings deal, but I would do something like this for sure:

Iginla for

Bernier
2013 2nd round pick
conditional 2014 1st round pick if the Kings make the Stanley Cup Finals in 2013.

I would also be looking at Tampa right now and talking to them about Kipper. In another 5-6 games they might be totally out, but I cannot help but think that with their offence they might be thinking they could make a miraculous run to the playoffs if they got a goalie. I would be enquiring about:

Kipper to Tampa for

2013 1st round pick (or make it a Jokinen style deal and give the Lightning the option to pick either a 2013 1st or 2014 1st)
a prospect (a mid level guy like Killorn).

If you could pull those two off I think long term the Flames would be ahead. Bernier has the potential to be a legitimate number one starter for years to come and you get a 1st, 2nd, mid level prospect and a potential first rounder in 2014.

[The Coppernian One]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Recently?

-Brendan Witt from the Capitals to Nashville for a prospect (Beech) and a first round pick.
-Ryan Smyth to the Islanders Robert Nillson (former first round pick) O'Marra(same) and a 1st rounder in 2007
-Bill Guerin to the Sharks for a 1st rounder
-Marian Hossa to the Penquins
-Brian Campbell from the Sabres to the Sharks for Bernier and a first rounder

I don't know how many of these are good examples though. If memory serves Beech wasn't really a high end prospect at that point, the Guerin trade didn't net a high end prospect in return, same for the Hossa trade (Erik Christensen was three years in the league at that point). Bernier may have been considered a good prospect, so I guess there's room to argue there.

The Smyth trade is probably a good example however with the inclusion of Robert Nilsson and to a lesser extent O'Marra.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by flamesrule_kipper34

Explain your reasoning behind thinking Tanguay could clear waivers?

You are crazy, absolutely crazy.

I can think of a couple reasons...

1. The NHL has an over abundance 0.80 point per game (60+ point), talented offensive wingers who are signed to below market value $3.5 million cap hits. Any GM can snag a 60+ point winger for free any time he wants. I bet you 4 or 5 of them are waived and claimed later today......it's easy to see how Tanguay would slip through the cracks when so many are freely available.

2. Tanguay had one year out of a 13 year career where point per game totals slipped to a lowly, despicable, embarrassing 0.46 points per game. Yes, you read that correctly. 0.46 points per game!! I honestly cannot believe he is still in the league after that disgusting season. He should be in the ECHL, or Europe at least.

3. He's a Flames player. Our players are all garbage because they are part of a losing team. Nobody ever wants players from a losing team, especially pathetic ones who only chalk up 0.80 points per game for the mammoth cost of Tanguay's $3.5 million cap hit.

4. He's signed at 5% of the total cap number until he's 36. 5% of next years cap until he's THIRTY SIX! He'll likely be nothing more than a pile of dust by then, and what GM would want to pay less than 5% of their cap for a pile of dust?

[Buff]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

I can think of a couple reasons...

1. The NHL has an over abundance 0.80 point per game (60+ point), talented offensive wingers who are signed to below market value $3.5 million cap hits. Any GM can snag a 60+ point winger for free any time he wants. I bet you 4 or 5 of them are waived and claimed later today......it's easy to see how Tanguay would slip through the cracks when so many are freely available.

2. Tanguay had one year out of a 13 year career where point per game totals slipped to a lowly, despicable, embarrassing 0.46 points per game. Yes, you read that correctly. 0.46 points per game!! I honestly cannot believe he is still in the league after that disgusting season. He should be in the ECHL, or Europe at least.

3. He's a Flames player. Our players are all garbage because they are part of a losing team. Nobody ever wants players from a losing team, especially pathetic ones who only chalk up 0.80 points per game for the mammoth cost of Tanguay's $3.5 million cap hit.

4. He's signed at 5% of the total cap number until he's 36. 5% of next years cap until he's THIRTY SIX! He'll likely be nothing more than a pile of dust by then, and what GM would want to pay less than 5% of their cap for a pile of dust?

Surely you not serious.