The Flames and Oilers rebuilds similar beginings

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

"useless Bouwmeester hate" ---- the signing of Wideman was thinking ahead with the plan/knowledge that Bouwmeeester was going to be dumped.

If Bouwmeester was a functional top pairing D-man the signing of Wideman to replace Hannan would not have been a priority.


I really like the Bouwmeester high-light package---- especially his great play in the Flames playoff runs.


You know that Bouwmeester was really bad when Hudler and Stempniak and even Pardy have enough good plays to put together a highlight package...... Haven't seen one from Bouwmeesters 279 games as Flame.

I hope Bouwmeester has an awesome year in St.Louis and makes the Olympic team just so you can shut the hell up about Bouwmeester.

Sick of this whiny Bouwmeester crap in every thread you post in.

He's gone, get over it. The troubles with this team over the last 4 years are much bigger than just Jay Bouwmeester.

[powderjunkie]

I too another interesting consideration is where other teams in the division will be in 3-4 years


LA KINGS: Doughty, Quick, Kopitar are all young...lots of guys in their prime nor who will still be solid or parlayed into something else

Anaheim: Hard to say how they will be post-Selanne era...Obviously hav Getz and Perry, with interesting guys in Etem and Silvferberg, but their goalies a both over 30 and an old D core.

Vancouver: I don't see them pulling off a good re-tool...especially with Gillis at the healm. I think they have a two year window, but beyond that are in trouble.

Phoenix: Good coaching will always keep them in the mix, but they have lots of late apex and post apex players...OEL will be very good, Smith is solid, but unlikely to be as dominant again, and is also 31.

San Jose: it will be interesting to see what happens this year...Thornton and Marleau will be UFA next summer...whether they keep pushing for a couple years with them or opt for a retool, they should be in really good shape with Couture, Burns, Niemi, Vlasic as an under 30 core.

Edmonton: They will be in second contract hell. They will probably be competitive, and of they turn the guys they can't afford into the right things they could be great, but I won't be surprised if they end up with a $40 M top 6 and still no way to keep the puck out of their net.


Overall, LA should still be on top, Vancouver/Phoenix won't be real players, and anything could happen with the other 3.

[kehatch]

Originally Posted by Loyal and True

Hello? How is this deal not cap friendly? I repeat...hello??

Thanks for layin down the law though. I'm not sure you understand what a debate is. Your arguments (e.g. do you even watch hockey) are not overwhelming, but nevertheless I know that the majority would share your opinion that a complete rebuilding would have been very easy to accomplish if only hockey ops could comprehend what the guys at TSN were saying 2 or 3 years ago.

You were using the contract as 'proof' that Iginla signing for a low contract now meant he wasn't worth 7-million 3 years ago following a 40+G 80+P season. It is a 6-million dollar contract. Not very good proof.

As for the rest, I did make a sound argument. Your arguments (the near last place Flames weren't bad before trading Iginla, 86-point 33 year old signed Iginla wouldn't have brought a much better return then 58-point 36 year old rental Iginla) don't make much sense at all.

Regardless, back to the topic. My take is:

The Flames are in a nearly identical situation that the Oiler's were in around 2007 or 2008. Whether that means we are in for a series of first overall picks and an extended playoff absence or whether we can turn that around more quickly (or whether we will continue to be just bad enough not to make the playoffs and never get those top draft picks) depends on:

1. The development of our prospects
2. The smarts of Flames management
3. A healthy dose of luck (one way or the other)

In other words we aren't any better off then they were but we aren't destined for the same path (could be better ... or could be worse).

[kehatch]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

A bottom team would not want Iginla. He would not have gone. What are the chances that a non-playoff teams makes an offer for Cammalleri?

It would have been interesting to see behind the scenes how Regher was enticed to move to Buffalo. Buffalo finished with 96 pts the season before the Regher trade and the Flames 94. The Sabres had cap space and an owner willing to spend 3M to dump Kotalik and the Flames had Bouwmeester and Iginla.



The return for Iginla a few years ago (43 goals) , using basic mathematics , would have had to include salary coming back. The very best rumored return would have been Mike Richards and a salary dump from LA.

The Flames couldn't have gotten Cammalleri without Bourque and his 3.3 M / year going the other way. At the time CP was happy because they thought Bourque had no value and would be a buy-out candidate.

We have gotten so used to Bouwmeester's near 7M anchor we fail to see what other teams expect from 7M players.


I totally agree that the Flames had cap burning a hole in their pocket when they signed Hudler. Wideman was a better cheaper Bouwmeester replacement.

He isn't saying we would have gotten a high draft pick for Iginla. He is saying that we would have gotten high draft picks because of starting a rebuild.

You have your facts mixed way up on the Iginla return. The rumored return was the one that eventually was given to Philly for Mike Richards (Schenn/Simmonds). There was never a rumor of getting Richards for Iginla (and certainly not from LA).

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by kehatch

You were using the contract as 'proof' that Iginla signing for a low contract now meant he wasn't worth 7-million 3 years ago following a 40+G 80+P season. It is a 6-million dollar contract. Not very good proof.

As for the rest, I did make a sound argument. Your arguments (the near last place Flames weren't bad before trading Iginla, 86-point 33 year old signed Iginla wouldn't have brought a much better return then 58-point 36 year old rental Iginla) don't make much sense at all.

Regardless, back to the topic. My take is:

The Flames are in a nearly identical situation that the Oiler's were in around 2007 or 2008. Whether that means we are in for a series of first overall picks and an extended playoff absence or whether we can turn that around more quickly (or whether we will continue to be just bad enough not to make the playoffs and never get those top draft picks) depends on:

1. The development of our prospects
2. The smarts of Flames management
3. A healthy dose of luck (one way or the other)

In other words we aren't any better off then they were but we aren't destined for the same path (could be better ... or could be worse).

The one big difference between Calgary and Edmonton is their depth players were just putrid. I could see the Flames being bad enough to get the first pick this up and coming season, but with all the pieces slated to come over the next couple season I don't think multiple firsts is going to happen.

[Loyal and True]

Originally Posted by kehatch

You were using the contract as 'proof' that Iginla signing for a low contract now meant he wasn't worth 7-million 3 years ago following a 40+G 80+P season. It is a 6-million dollar contract. Not very good proof.

As for the rest, I did make a sound argument. Your arguments (the near last place Flames weren't bad before trading Iginla, 86-point 33 year old signed Iginla wouldn't have brought a much better return then 58-point 36 year old rental Iginla) don't make much sense at all.

Regardless, back to the topic. My take is:

The Flames are in a nearly identical situation that the Oiler's were in around 2007 or 2008. Whether that means we are in for a series of first overall picks and an extended playoff absence or whether we can turn that around more quickly (or whether we will continue to be just bad enough not to make the playoffs and never get those top draft picks) depends on:

1. The development of our prospects
2. The smarts of Flames management
3. A healthy dose of luck (one way or the other)

In other words we aren't any better off then they were but we aren't destined for the same path (could be better ... or could be worse).

Sigh.
The current Iginla contract is merely a one year deal and over 2/3 of the dollars will not count against the cap this year... it carries over to next year. You missed the point. It shows how difficult it would have been to add a veteran winger with a straight 7M cap hit with two or three years left. So the market for Iginla would have been extremely small, not to mention Iginla's leverage to pick his destination. I am not sure Iginla would have chosen LA since they did not have Richards, Carter or Sutter back then and had not yet done any damage in playoffs. The cap hit is a huge part of the trade equation, and Iginla's huge cap hit was prohibitive to most suitors, since most teams Iginla would consider are already close to the cap.

In offseason a team with cap room could sign a ufa winger to a 2 or 3 year deal at 7 per, without giving away the precious long term assets. Obviously you can't get a young Mike Richards with his long term cap friendly deal on the ufa market, so you can justify trading long term assets for him. Totally different from Iginla.

So I understand that 33 years is more attractive than 35 and that a late 40 goal season should help trade value as opposed to 30 goals, but I maintain that the huge cap hit for long term was a major negative in any hypothetical trade scenario.

The flames season was not Oilers-bad-60 point season, as you implied the Flames were just as bad as the Oilers when they totally bottomed out. Flames were .500 about mid march before the Iginla distraction took hold and the teardown followed soon after. Mediocre along with Dallas, Phx etc. Further if you read Kent Wilson or look at behind-the-net advanced stats you know that the team was 8th or 9th in Fenwick Close, but the story of the season was that save percentage was rock bottom which cost the team in the win/loss column.

[kehatch]

Originally Posted by Loyal and True

Sigh.
The current Iginla contract is merely a one year deal and over 2/3 of the dollars will not count against the cap this year... it carries over to next year. You missed the point. It shows how difficult it would have been to add a veteran winger with a straight 7M cap hit with two or three years left. So the market for Iginla would have been extremely small, not to mention Iginla's leverage to pick his destination. I am not sure Iginla would have chosen LA since they did not have Richards, Carter or Sutter back then and had not yet done any damage in playoffs. The cap hit is a huge part of the trade equation, and Iginla's huge cap hit was prohibitive to most suitors, since most teams Iginla would consider are already close to the cap.

In offseason a team with cap room could sign a ufa winger to a 2 or 3 year deal at 7 per, without giving away the precious long term assets. Obviously you can't get a young Mike Richards with his long term cap friendly deal on the ufa market, so you can justify trading long term assets for him. Totally different from Iginla.

So I understand that 33 years is more attractive than 35 and that a late 40 goal season should help trade value as opposed to 30 goals, but I maintain that the huge cap hit for long term was a major negative in any hypothetical trade scenario.

The flames season was not Oilers-bad-60 point season, as you implied the Flames were just as bad as the Oilers when they totally bottomed out. Flames were .500 about mid march before the Iginla distraction took hold and the teardown followed soon after. Mediocre along with Dallas, Phx etc. Further if you read Kent Wilson or look at behind-the-net advanced stats you know that the team was 8th or 9th in Fenwick Close, but the story of the season was that save percentage was rock bottom which cost the team in the win/loss column.

You never had a point to miss. If you think there was an extremely small market for a guy like Iginla coming off of a 40+ G 80+ P season because he made 7-million you don't know what you are talking about. The guy had better then a PPG in 4 of the prior 5 seasons and was coming off his tenth 30 goal season. You think teams were going to balk at 7M for 3 more seasons? Rubbish.

I stand by my argument that the Flames would be in much better shape if they started the rebuild following the 10/11 season rather then let themselves get fooled by the late season push. To be frank I am surprised that is even a debate as it is as obvious as saying you get wet when you jump in the water.

As for the rest I get the Flames weren't as bad last season as the Oiler's were at their worst. I never said they were. I said we are in a similar place as the Oiler's were coming off of their 08/09 season.

However, since we traded away two of our three best players with the third retiring without actually replacing them chances are we are inline for a 60ish point season next season. Barring a series of breakouts from Flames prospects we are in for a long long season.

[kehatch]

Originally Posted by Robbob

The one big difference between Calgary and Edmonton is their depth players were just putrid. I could see the Flames being bad enough to get the first pick this up and coming season, but with all the pieces slated to come over the next couple season I don't think multiple firsts is going to happen.

I don't know if that is really true though.

Edmonton had their veterans like Penner, Horcoff, Gilbert, Hemsky, Souray, Whitney, etc. Are the Flames any deeper with guys like Cammalleri, Hudler, Stempniak, Glencross, Wideman, and Giordano?

We have our Backlunds, Baertschis, and Brodies. But they had their Gagners, Coglianos, and Smids.

We are excited about our prospects. But they had just as many prospects to be excited about and were singing the praise of Eberle, Brule, Gagner, Plante, Nash, Paajarvi, Omark, Petry, Pechham, etc.

There are certainly differences between the two rebuilds. But we are in a remarkably similar circumstance as Edmonton was going into the 09/10 season.

Every fan base has rose colored glasses about their prospects. Vancouver has one of the worst prospect pools in the NHL right now. But go over there and half of their fan base is convinced that the future us rosy because they picked up Horvat and Shinkaruk.

The Flames have a strong prospect pool (that sounds weird to say). But we still have a long ways to go to rebuild a successful hockey club. I don't think it is something we turn around in a season.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by kehatch

I don't know if that is really true though.

Edmonton had their veterans like Penner, Horcoff, Gilbert, Hemsky, Souray, Whitney, etc. Are the Flames any deeper with guys like Cammalleri, Hudler, Stempniak, Glencross, Wideman, and Giordano?

We have our Backlunds, Baertschis, and Brodies. But they had their Gagners, Coglianos, and Smids.

We are excited about our prospects. But they had just as many prospects to be excited about and were singing the praise of Eberle, Brule, Gagner, Plante, Nash, Paajarvi, Omark, Petry, Pechham, etc.

There are certainly differences between the two rebuilds. But we are in a remarkably similar circumstance as Edmonton was going into the 09/10 season.

Every fan base has rose colored glasses about their prospects. Vancouver has one of the worst prospect pools in the NHL right now. But go over there and half of their fan base is convinced that the future us rosy because they picked up Horvat and Shinkaruk.

The Flames have a strong prospect pool (that sounds weird to say). But we still have a long ways to go to rebuild a successful hockey club. I don't think it is something we turn around in a season.

I agree there is almost no way this thing gets turned around in a year. I do like the Flames vets much more than the Oilers vets however. We also have a similar amount of impact prospects that Edmonton had at that time.

One thing I thing that will be interesting to watch is to see if Hartley can get the Flames to play hard for 82 games. The Oilers seemed to just mail it in for large portions of the last 4 seasons. The Flames will give the kids a chance so there will be prospects chomping at the bit to get called up and veterans who may find themselves in the press-box if they are not giving it their all.

Vancouver fans love having Hunter and Bo because they are the first prospects they could get excited about since Cody. We are doing our top prospect voting right now and I wonder if recent first round picks Klimchuck and Poirier will make the top 10. The Flames are deeper now than the Oilers were in 10/11. I think the Flames are missing a couple of huge pieces that they can possibly address in the next draft or 2 (Big #1 D, and RW).

The Flames need the late round picks to pan out to be NHLers. I personally think Edmonton's biggest problem is their amazing prospects come from their lotto picks outside of Eberle. This is a team that has drafted high in the 2nd and 3rd round with little to show for it. Tambellini was literally the worst GM in hockey. He would pick the consensus #1, make a few bad trades, and do literally nothing until the deadline where he would try to offload their deadweight forwards.

[Loyal and True]

Originally Posted by kehatch

You never had a point to miss. If you think there was an extremely small market for a guy like Iginla coming off of a 40+ G 80+ P season because he made 7-million you don't know what you are talking about. The guy had better then a PPG in 4 of the prior 5 seasons and was coming off his tenth 30 goal season. You think teams were going to balk at 7M for 3 more seasons? Rubbish.

I stand by my argument that the Flames would be in much better shape if they started the rebuild following the 10/11 season rather then let themselves get fooled by the late season push. To be frank I am surprised that is even a debate as it is as obvious as saying you get wet when you jump in the water.

As for the rest I get the Flames weren't as bad last season as the Oiler's were at their worst. I never said they were. I said we are in a similar place as the Oiler's were coming off of their 08/09 season.

However, since we traded away two of our three best players with the third retiring without actually replacing them chances are we are inline for a 60ish point season next season. Barring a series of breakouts from Flames prospects we are in for a long long season.

What sad attempt to bully and you still don't care to understand what the argument is. Anybody would like Iginla but if you are a cup contender in a cap system, it is almost impossible to fit him in at 7M x 3 years. You have to lose some other quality players in the lineup, so how much more does the team pay in futures and prospects? Especially when the ufa market has an annual crop of 30ish forwards with 30ish goal seasons who can be signed for less than 7M and you don't have to give up any long term assets?

You seem to need to pat yourself on the back for making some obvious correct statements in a previous post. The sooner you start rebuilding, the sooner you get to the middle of the rebuild. No. Kidding.

In 2011 they traded Regehr and Langkow for younger players, and they stopped being significant buyers at the deadlines. So there is an obvious transition at the time but Feaster is publicly talking about the playoffs and the 2nd half surge yada yada. Now that Iginla's contract was expiring and J Bouw's almost done, they could finally do the deals and publicly acknowledge an obvious rebuilld.

Edit: Flames will likely be in the bottom 5 next year, because we are obviously rebuilding and now already have a top 10 prospect pool.

Oilers just fell apart. They did have Gagner, Eberle, etc and then were 30th place team for years.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Loyal and True

What sad attempt to bully and you still don't care to understand what the argument is. Anybody would like Iginla but if you are a cup contender in a cap system, it is almost impossible to fit him in at 7M x 3 years. You have got to lose some other quality players in the lineup, so how much more does the team pay in futures and prospects? Especially when the ufa market has an annual crop of 30ish forwards with 30ish goal seasons who can be signed for less than 7M and you don't have to give up any long term assets?

You seem to need to pat yourself on the back for making some obvious correct statements in a previous post. The sooner you start rebuilding, the sooner you get to the middle of the rebuild. No. Kidding.

In 2011 they traded Regehr and Langkow for younger players, and they stopped being significant buyers at the deadlines. So there is an obvious transition at the time but Feaster is publicly talking about the playoffs and the 2nd half surge yada yada. Now that Iginla's contract was expiring and J Bouw's almost done, they could finally do the deals and publicly acknowledge an obvious rebuild.

Other than 2009 when were the Flames really big buyers at the deadline? Feaster made his big Cammalleri trade in 2012 which was as big as any in season trade that Sutter made when he was GM outside the 09 deadline.

I think Iggy was easliy movable in the 2010/2011 season and the Kings might have been a team that there would be mutual interest. The Kings had the same core that won the cup outside of Richards and Carter and had the cap space to take on the contract. They were also a team that was trending upwards at the time. That whole season there was a Schenn+ for Iggy+ rumor until the Flames went on their run.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by Loyal and True

What sad attempt to bully and you still don't care to understand what the argument is. Anybody would like Iginla but if you are a cup contender in a cap system, it is almost impossible to fit him in at 7M x 3 years. You have got to lose some other quality players in the lineup, so how much more does the team pay in futures and prospects? Especially when the ufa market has an annual crop of 30ish forwards with 30ish goal seasons who can be signed for less than 7M and you don't have to give up any long term assets?

You seem to need to pat yourself on the back for making some obvious correct statements in a previous post. The sooner you start rebuilding, the sooner you get to the middle of the rebuild. No. Kidding.

In 2011 they traded Regehr and Langkow for younger players, and they stopped being significant buyers at the deadlines. So there is an obvious transition at the time but Feaster is publicly talking about the playoffs and the 2nd half surge yada yada. Now that Iginla's contract was expiring and J Bouw's almost done, they could finally do the deals and publicly acknowledge an obvious rebuilld.

Edit: Flames will likely be in the bottom 5 next year, because we are obviously rebuilding and now already have a top 10 prospect pool.

Oilers just fell apart. They did have Gagner, Eberle, etc and then were 30th place team for years.

I think you missing some points on Iggy's worth and being able to be traded. It seems like you are talking more about trade deadline deals when teams don't want to give up roster players in trade. If Iggy had been traded in the summer, its not $7 million going one way, there would be roster players with $'s coming back. Also in the summer there are more teams that look on paper that they will have a shot, so the list would probably be more than 4 teams that you would get at the deadline. You don't think last summer Iggy would have thought about Carolina? The summer before Washington? Philly would be up there also on most years.

[Loyal and True]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

I think you missing some points on Iggy's worth and being able to be traded. It seems like you are talking more about trade deadline deals when teams don't want to give up roster players in trade. If Iggy had been traded in the summer, its not $7 million going one way, there would be roster players with $'s coming back. Also in the summer there are more teams that look on paper that they will have a shot, so the list would probably be more than 4 teams that you would get at the deadline. You don't think last summer Iggy would have thought about Carolina? The summer before Washington? Philly would be up there also on most years.

No I agree with you that in offseason there are more teams to talk to. But if they are a very good team then their roster players coming back have value too. Then you factor in the offseason ufa market is there at that time and many teams that want to make a run will add a veteran player without giving up their prized prospects.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

You don't think last summer Iggy would have thought about Carolina? The summer before Washington? Philly would be up there also on most years.

Since winning the Stanley Cup, Carolina has missed the playoffs six years out of seven. If Iginla wanted to go to a contender, they would be one of the last teams on his list.

Washington is at least a regular playoff team, but what makes you think they would want to spend $7 million a year on another elite winger? If it's the summer of 2011 you're talking about, they already had Ovechkin with a cap hit of $9.5 million and Semin at 6.7. The Caps had no use for Iginla, unless they were crazy enough to trade Semin for him straight up — bearing in mind that Semin is 7 years younger.

It really is very rare, since the cap came in, for a star player with a big cap hit to be traded with multiple years left on his contract — at any time of year.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by Loyal and True

No I agree with you that in offseason there are more teams to talk to. But if they are a very good team then their roster players coming back have value too. Then you factor in the offseason ufa market is there at that time and many teams that want to make a run will add a veteran player without giving up their prized prospects.

How many UFA veteran players were even remotley as good as Iggy a couple of seasons ago or at least had the type of hype that Iggy would get?

Even if we had traded him last summer he would have brought a lot more back than what he got at the deadline. Iggy had a bad year by his standards last year, and there was a lot of talk that he had lost a step. Iggy's stock dropped big time last year.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Since winning the Stanley Cup, Carolina has missed the playoffs six years out of seven. If Iginla wanted to go to a contender, they would be one of the last teams on his list.

Washington is at least a regular playoff team, but what makes you think they would want to spend $7 million a year on another elite winger? If it's the summer of 2011 you're talking about, they already had Ovechkin with a cap hit of $9.5 million and Semin at 6.7. The Caps had no use for Iginla, unless they were crazy enough to trade Semin for him straight up — bearing in mind that Semin is 7 years younger.

It really is very rare, since the cap came in, for a star player with a big cap hit to be traded with multiple years left on his contract — at any time of year.

Its rare for a star player be traded with multiple years left because they are a star that can help the team that they are on.


As for Carolina they had made a splash in the summer and most thought they would make the playoffs. St. Louis last summer had some hype to do some damage this year. There are always more teams in the summer in the hype machine.

Also Pitt would have probably payed more last summer than they did at the deadline.

[Loyal and True]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Other than 2009 when were the Flames really big buyers at the deadline? Feaster made his big Cammalleri trade in 2012 which was as big as any in season trade that Sutter made when he was GM outside the 09 deadline.

I think Iggy was easliy movable in the 2010/2011 season and the Kings might have been a team that there would be mutual interest. The Kings had the same core that won the cup outside of Richards and Carter and had the cap space to take on the contract. They were also a team that was trending upwards at the time. That whole season there was a Schenn+ for Iggy+ rumor until the Flames went on their run.

Cammy trade we gave away Bourque who scored quite a few goals for us but needed to move on. Traded a pick but get Ramo. I agree that Flames were not tanking and they obviously wanted to make the playoffs at the time.

Schenn was obviously someone LA would part with in the right package. They landed Richards who is young, long term affordable contract and elite. In my opinion Flames would have needed to throw in future assets to be comparable value. Iggy + Backlund+ for Schenn or Iggy + 1st (Baertschi) for Schenn+

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

Its rare for a star player be traded with multiple years left because they are a star that can help the team that they are on.

It sounds like a good explanation, but it explains too much. If that were the reason, it would be equally rare for a star player with an expiring contract to be traded — but it isn't.

As for Carolina they had made a splash in the summer and most thought they would make the playoffs. St. Louis last summer had some hype to do some damage this year. There are always more teams in the summer in the hype machine.

I can't recall anybody identifying either Carolina or St. Louis as a contender for the Stanley Cup the last few years. Iginla wasn't interested in moving to the kind of team where just making the playoffs is an improvement — and a team like that isn't looking to blow future assets on a winger in his mid-30s.

[Loyal and True]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

How many UFA veteran players were even remotley as good as Iggy a couple of seasons ago or at least had the type of hype that Iggy would get?

Even if we had traded him last summer he would have brought a lot more back than what he got at the deadline. Iggy had a bad year by his standards last year, and there was a lot of talk that he had lost a step. Iggy's stock dropped big time last year.

I am not saying those ufas are just as good as iggy but they are likely cheaper than 7M also. Main thing is the ufas allow you to keep your prospects and picks in your own cupboard.

I haven't checked whether Boston, Pit etc had 7M cap space at the start of last year and all that. I would say that the long lockout and CBA uncertainty made it difficult for a lot of teams to do what they should have done in the fall. Then everything in January is rushed to get a 48 game season going.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

It sounds like a good explanation, but it explains too much. If that were the reason, it would be equally rare for a star player with an expiring contract to be traded — but it isn't.

with the expiring contract the decision is not to keep the guy like Iginla at 6-7M /year for the rest of the year and likely not make the playoffs OR trade him and get some value. He also will not be coming back no matter what the team offers... wants a top 6 role on a playoff team rather being #1 on a rebuild.

If Iginla had 2 years left on his contract (through 2014-15) 1) Pittsburgh would not want him for futures .... they would have to unload some contract $ from 2013-2015 that they did not have as witnessed by the fact that they did not sign him.

2) Boston may have offered the prospect package figuring out that they would have to make the moves they ended up doing to get Iginla at 6M, BUT they would not have wanted his extra year on the contract as shown by the fact that he is on a 1 year deal with them now.

The expiring contract provided the team with certainty of what they want going forward.

It usually is a huge mistake to acquire a Cammalleri who has 3 years left on his 6 M contract. It would have been better to have Cammalleri's on a short term deal.

I don't think that any team is offering the Flames a 1st round pick for Cammalleri this off season..... they might once they figure out that they will make the playoffs and the pick will be 20+ and Cammalleri might be the key for an extra round or 2 in the playoffs.

If Iginla had been signed by the Flames through 2015 he would be the Flames veteran leader to help the young guys learn to play in the NHL not either his or the Flames best choice. That role has fallen to Cammalleri.

Iginla was getting paid 7M and was worth 6... Cammalleri is getting paid 6M and is worth something closer to 3-4.