Cammalleri - going forward

[neo45]

Originally Posted by _Q_

This notion of getting a high first rounder vs. low first rounder is hilarious. As if the team we trade with has the option where they would like their first round pick to land.

Well last year the Pitt pick was all but guaranteed to be lower than 24th, as they were contending for the presidents trophy and only a monumental collapse would have seen them miss the playoffs.


The St Louis pick was traded with a condition that if they missed the playoffs the pick turned into their 2014 pick. The pick was "lottery protected".

The Boston pick that was traded for Jagr also had a condition, and couldn't have been higher than 26th overall (it would have become a second rounder had they failed to win 2 playoff rounds)


So yes, GM's do try to control these things

[gargamel]

Originally Posted by neo45

If we get a first rounder for him it is unlikely that it is a high first rounder as only teams with solidified playoff position would give up a first rounder at the deadline for an expiring contract.

Which is exactly why the theory that we'd get a better return for Cammalleri at the deadline is nonsense. A team like Philly would probably give up a first rounder for him now in hopes that they'd make the playoffs, but they wouldn't give up anything for him near the deadline if they're out of the running. I like Cammalleri and would be happy to keep him, but I think we should trade him now if we're ever going to.

[sa226]

I really like Cammi. But despite him always saying the right things in the media, I doubt he wants to stay here, especially at his age.

I think people see him as trade bait, because he is a veteran scorer on an expiring contract. With his playoff history combined with his early play, I bet a ton of teams would love to have him.

Sent from my SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

[SeanCharles]

Originally Posted by Miniac

You lost me at Gaudreau on the 4th line...

I didn't intend to set lines. I just figure him to be on the 23 man roster.... He would most definitely play in the top 9.

[Poe969]

Originally Posted by T@T

Please explain your reasoning.

Eplaining my reasononing for wanting him traded is because I honestly don't think he is a good mentor or leader (I will openly say I have no facts to back this up, it's what I think not what I know). He seems like he's just an offensive player who is more of a "hired gun" then anything else. At this point, I prefer having Hudler on the team.

As for wanting him to play well so we can trade him at the deadline, well I want his value to increase drastically so a team over pays for him in a trade. If we could get a first rounder and a say a prospect or even a second or some good combination of picks and prospects then I think it will benefit the team more long term.

As for him getting a high contract, I really dont' think he's worth it, not to the Flames anyway. Sure he scores goals but he also gets injured often and I really don't think he wants to be here long term (again, no facts to back this up, I just feel that way). I think he'll end up in either southern ontario, buffalo or somehwere with no snow.

[Split98]

I love him on this team. Beyond his skill and what he brings to the ice I think he is a good fit for the awesome new attitude this team has.

However, adding Gaudreau next year we have a pretty full lineup:

Baertschi-Monahan-Hudler
Gaudreau-Backlund-Jones
Galiardi-Colborne-Stempniak
Bouma-Knight-Horak
Mcgrattan

And I think we keep Stempniak over Cammalleri. He's a lower cap, and can play with anyone on any line. Cammalleri is going to need top line minutes, and we have a lot of options in the top 6 right now. We will loose a solid top line player, but I can imagine that we'll get a good return while not really leaving us a giant hole up front.

With that lineup above, and Glencross and Cammalleri getting us picks... I REALLY like the look of this team going forward

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by nik-

Asset maximization. I would like to trade him near the deadline, but if he wanted to come back afterwards to a smaller deal, I would be all for him mentoring the youth.

I would trade him as soon as a team offers a top 15 first round pick and a prospect. Now or trade deadline does not matter.

[Poe969]

well we don't exactly know who's going to be a top 15 pick and the odds of a lower end team trading their frist rounder isn't too good. I do agree that if a team offered a first and prospect now (especially a team who doesn't look that strong) we should take it.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by T@T

Please explain your reasoning.

I agree with Poe. Sven, Gaudreau, Glencross, Ferland, Klimchuck are all vying for LW spots and Cammy cab possibly fetch us a first or a 2nd and a good prospect.

[edn88]

I'd like to see Squid here beyond this year... partly because I like him as a player, and if he can make it through a rebuild, he is a good asset to have - especially at the right price.

[Anduril]

As said the decision has to be between Stempniak as they both offer similar value to the team. Aging veterans who are leaders you want on any kind of team, scorers who put up points because they put the puck on the net, and a fan favorite because of their effort.

It'll be hard but I honestly think Cammy will be the guy to be moved and Stempniak extended.
While Cammy has the higher skill level, he will fetch us a greater return at the deadline, plays at a crowded position and Stempniak gives more of a physical play while being a RH RW.

[Heavy Jack]

I love Cammy, I really do. I think trading him this year really comes down to whether or not we are competitive come the time the offers start presenting themselves. Going forward though I want a guy like Gaudreau to come in and replace that small LWer player that Cammy is for us right now. If we can turn Cammy into assets that make sense and are more valuable than seeing out his contract I say pull the trigger.

[kyuss275]

My problem with these threads is that it ends up seeming like posters want to keep Cammi, Stempniak, Stajan, Hudler ect. Some of these guys have to go. We need to get bigger and have spots open for some youth in a couple of years.

Stajan is gone in my books and Hudler should stay because of skill and plays well with youngsters.

It leaves Stempniak and Cammi. I see Cammi wanting a lot of money to stay.

Whoever the flames pick to stay, i hope they don't give out a contract that is not moveable. Things change and Flames need to have the freedom to be able to move a Cammi contract if need be. I do not want to see a $5.5+ million contract on Cammi or something big on Stempniak.

[Deegee]

Move Stempniak, and then keep Cammy. Do a shorter term, higher cap hit. 5-5.5, 3 years.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

My problem with these threads is that it ends up seeming like posters want to keep Cammi, Stempniak, Stajan, Hudler ect. Some of these guys have to go. We need to get bigger and have spots open for some youth in a couple of years.

Stajan is gone in my books and Hudler should stay because of skill and plays well with youngsters.

It leaves Stempniak and Cammi. I see Cammi wanting a lot of money to stay.

Whoever the flames pick to stay, i hope they don't give out a contract that is not moveable. Things change and Flames need to have the freedom to be able to move a Cammi contract if need be. I do not want to see a $5.5+ million contract on Cammi or something big on Stempniak.

I agree that we can't keep everybody. I think there would be value in keeping one of Stempniak or Cammalleri though.

Several things come into the decision as to who to keep, and one of them would definitely be - what would the returns be? And it is probably safe to assume that Cammy would return more. The fact that Stempniak is a right hand shot is also important.

But regardless of who stays and who goes, I think they HAVE TO follow the process whereby if the player hasn't signed an extension by the deadline that they are moved.

If they decide to keep Cammy I would be fine with that, but he has to sign. They cannot let these guys walk for nothing.

[Stay Golden]

The Flames brass mad the mistake with Cammy last time he was in his contract year to table an offer he would sign but felt confident he would. They lost him for nothing in return.
Surely they will not repeat the same mistake again for a second time.
They have to get going with his agent and ask Cammy directly and his agent what are looking for $ and do you want to resign?
If the figure is reasonable then start the negotiation process.
If he wavers at all with an answer like I want to wait and see how the season goes or we will talk later I just want to focus on the season. Trade him at the deadline 100%.
Cammy is all about the $ figure he plays for I firmly believe that.
I like the guy as a player but if he wants more than what he is really worth again or stalls with talks get rid of him near the deadline.

[FAN]

Will the Flames be a playoff team this year? Will they be next year? If the answer is yes to either of those questions then you seriously consider keeping Cammy. If not, then you look to move Cammy.

Veteran leadership can be obtained through free agency. Heck, Cammy can even be re-signed.

[strombad]

Part of the problem with the "move Cammy" crowd is the return they're willing to take. We can't know what he's like in the dressing room, or how much he likes this club, but we can guess. If he wants to stay and is good in the room, you keep him, but you have to KNOW that beforehand. The problem a lot of rebuilds have is that they trade high value veterans for a small return. You can do that with a few (Iginla, Bouw) but you can't do that with ALL of them.

If you continue, you turn into Edmonton. Zero higher end veterans on the back end, and one mid-average guy in Hemsky. That's not what you want.

We're good on the back end, but we cant just go expecting to be competitive if we get rid of all our high end guys on the front. People do up roster predictions that have all these young guys on them, but in the end it may be smart to say "Well, let's move a bigger name prospect". That way, you're going to get a high return from almost anybody. Trade a LW prospect for a hard nosed RW prospect, or something. Trade a small guy for a bigger guy, that sort of thing. There's no reason it HAS to be Cammy, and history has shown that dropping all your veterans for a team that is 3/4 players under 4 years of NHL experience is probably a mistake.

This team isn't going to be successful if we're looking at Backlund as one of our main veteran presence. If we trade Cammy, fine, but only if the return is an overpayment or he's on his way out anyway. Otherwise that sort of veteran is far more valuable to us that a Klimchuck and a Cundari.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by strombad

that with a few (Iginla, Bouw) but you can't do that with ALL of them.

If you continue, you turn into Edmonton. Zero higher end veterans on the back end, and one mid-average guy in Hemsky. That's not what you want.

Even with both Cammalleri and Stajan moved, the Flames would have the following veteran forwards next season:

Hudler
Glencross
Stempniak
D. Jones
Galiardi
McGratton

It's safe to pencil in Monahan, Baertschi, and Backlund next season.

That leaves three roster spots for the following players to fight for:

Bouma
Colborne
Horak
Knight
Street
Reinhart
Ferland
Granlund
Hanowski
Agostino
Gaudreau (?)

Not to mention UFA signings.

That doesn't look like three-quarters rookies/young players to me. And if Backlund won't be considered a veteran by next season - his 5th in the NHL - when will he be? His 7th season? 8th?

[strombad]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Even with both Cammalleri and Stajan moved, the Flames would have the following veteran forwards next season:

Hudler
Glencross
Stempniak
D. Jones
Galiardi
McGratton

So it's not as though there won't be any veteran presence. And if Backlund won't be considered a veteran by next season - his 5th in the NHL - when will he be? His 7th season? 8th?

I count one of those guys who is even close to "high end".