Cammalleri - going forward - Page 3 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Vinny01 · 10-28-2013, 09:31 AM

100% pure speculation on the FAN with Freidman about the Blues wanting a goal scoring/game breaking forward at the deadline and a player like Cammy could be of interest. Boomer mentioned that the Flames would probably love to get Rattie. Again this was pure hypothetical discussion so no rumor or anything.

Rattie + 2nd would be a nice return for Mike

BlackWallStreet · 10-28-2013, 09:37 AM

Duuuuuude! Rattie would be amazing

Tinordi · 10-28-2013, 09:39 AM

Rattie sucks

Flash Walken · 10-28-2013, 09:42 AM

Any return that doesn't include a pick in the top 20 is a bad return for Cammalleri.

SuperMatt18 · 10-28-2013, 09:46 AM

Agree, would rather have the first for Cammy or at least a prospect with some size.

Rattie's game has not translated at all to the AHL so far, and I would rather we not add another smallish top 6 forward.

FlamesAddiction · 10-28-2013, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Rattie sucks

I don't know enough about him to have an opinion, but there seem to be a lot of people that don't like him. His junior stats are great.

Personally, I think I would roll the dice with a 1st round pick anyway, for the main reason that I think they are easier to use when trading up in the draft (which if the Flames are again outside of the top 5, I would like them to do).

Tinordi · 10-28-2013, 09:48 AM

And we should absolutely be trading Cammalleri by the deadline this year, especially, if he keeps up his play. You need to understand that you're making moves for three to five years from now not for instant gratification. Is Cammelleri going to be a part of a contending Flames team? No. But his return will help us build towards that.

If Cammalleri is in the 30-40 goal range by the deadline then move him for a 1st, 2nd, and a solid defensive prospect. Not some pseudo-prospect like Hnat Domnichelli 2.0.

dissentowner · 10-28-2013, 09:54 AM

I think we should re-sign him. He has a great passion for the game and you can't just go full out youth, you need some vets too.

FlamesAddiction · 10-28-2013, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I think we should re-sign him. He has a great passion for the game and you can't just go full out youth, you need some vets too.

You would have to think though, that at 30 years old and only a few prime years left, he might want to go to a team that is closer to competing for the Cup.

If he wants to stay, I would be all for re-signing him though. I just have my doubts that won't want to look at the market in July.

SofaProfessor · 10-28-2013, 10:05 AM

I doubt Cammy wants to stick around for less than 5 years. If he's here beyond this season it's going to be a long term deal with a lot of money which is not something that benefits the Flames, or even Cammalleri, if he plans on winning a cup anytime soon.

flamesfan55 · 10-28-2013, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinny01

100% pure speculation on the FAN with Freidman about the Blues wanting a goal scoring/game breaking forward at the deadline and a player like Cammy could be of interest. Boomer mentioned that the Flames would probably love to get Rattie. Again this was pure hypothetical discussion so no rumor or anything.

Rattie + 2nd would be a nice return for Mike

As soon as I heard this I thought of the exact same return you stated. But like someone above stated he has translated poorly in the AHL.

Caged Great · 10-28-2013, 10:08 AM

I would leave the decision to stay or to go in Cammalleri's hands. He's a good veteran player to have in a rebuild as he gives 100% every time he's on the ice and that's the type of guy that you'd like young guys to learn from. However, Cammalleri likely wants to win a cup, and I can't really blame him for that. So if he wants to stay, offer him 3/18, which is fair. If not, ask him what teams would he prefer to get dealt to at the deadline and try to work out a deal with them.

By showing respect to Cammalleri in this regard by allowing him the freedom to decide what he would like to do, it will show that the Flames are a good place to play as we are willing to work with the players to find a fit that works for them, whether it's here or elsewhere. Getting a good reputation for being classy to work with will increase the likelihood of players wanting to sign here once we are on the upswing.

Vinny01 · 10-28-2013, 10:09 AM

It seems to sound like the Flames will be signing Gaudreau at the end of the year. With him coming on board I am not so sure there is room for a small Cammy in the lineup. Sven, Cammy, Gaudreau are 3 small LW. Guys like Ferland will be pushing for spots next year as well. I rather the Flames get assets for Cammy at the deadline.

If he does get re-signed I could get on board with it if Glencross is moved and Cammy is signed to a very cap friendly deal (less than 5 years and less than $5M per).

strombad · 10-28-2013, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tinordi

And we should absolutely be trading Cammalleri by the deadline this year, especially, if he keeps up his play. You need to understand that you're making moves for three to five years from now not for instant gratification. Is Cammelleri going to be a part of a contending Flames team? No. But his return will help us build towards that.

If Cammalleri is in the 30-40 goal range by the deadline then move him for a 1st, 2nd, and a solid defensive prospect. Not some pseudo-prospect like Hnat Domnichelli 2.0.

To be fair, you cannot say that statement with any definitive credibility. We could still be pushing in 2-3, when he's still (while a little older) a potentially high end threat. Making moves 3 to 5 years from now is great, but (since it's been brought up here) look at St.Louis. You've got a team that went through a fair short rebuild, but now is missing that piece to push them over the top and are looking at the trade route to acquire that sort of guy.

Not to say we can't trade Cammy, but people need to be aware that there's a chance we don't have a prospect that replaces him, so in 3 to 5 years we are acquiring that player for picks and prospects.

Flash Walken · 10-28-2013, 10:22 AM

Hudler at 4 > Cammalleri at 4, 5 or 6.

nik- · 10-28-2013, 10:30 AM

Not interested in Rattie as the centerpiece.

Tinordi · 10-28-2013, 10:32 AM

St. Louis had a short rebuild? Looks like it took 6 years to build into a contender.

FlamesAddiction · 10-28-2013, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flamesfan55

As soon as I heard this I thought of the exact same return you stated. But like someone above stated he has translated poorly in the AHL.

Even last season when Rattie came up, people didn't want him. I'm kind of curious as to what is in his game that people don't like.

He only has 9 AHL games, so the sample size is really small.

Fire · 10-28-2013, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Rattie's game has not translated at all to the AHL so far, and I would rather we not add another smallish top 6 forward.

I agree, rather have a 1st rounder + an average prospect over Rattie and a 2nd rounder. Assuming the Blues would do that in the first place.

strombad · 10-28-2013, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tinordi

St. Louis had a short rebuild? Looks like it took 6 years to build into a contender.

If you call it 6 years, then Calgary is already in year 4 comparatively.