[News] Burke trade deadline presser 3:25pm MT

[Scoutski]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

It's gotta be disappointment when you put that much work into orchestrating a 3 way and it doesn't materialize when you thought it was so close.

Well played.

[Burke Salad]

It's time to stop crapping all over Butler, and start looking at Wideman as the guy that is stealing money from this organization! Seriously he is useless!

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by Burke Salad

It's time to stop crapping all over Butler, and start looking at Wideman as the guy that is stealing money from this organization! Seriously he is useless!

Wideman is still better than Butler in every category. Has double Butler's points in 16 less games. Sure he's overpaid. Plain and simple, the Flames would probably be better off without either player, but Wideman brings much more to the table, even when he's a disaster defensively.

Burke should stay far, far away from another contract offer to Chris Butler, imo. Give that money to Cammalleri

[moon]

Originally Posted by saillias

My concern was more meant to question whether Burke is getting a free ride from fans. IMO being around Calgary message boards was nauseating back when In ``Sutter We Trust`` was the motto.

I may have only seen one side of the posts but I saw a ton of negative, over the top posts about Burke when we hadn't dealt Cammy and the return for Berra wasn't known or the Stempniak deal.

I don't think Burke is getting a free pass and looking at the grades in the that thread he certainly is taking flack for not dealing Cammy. I just think that so many are happy/surprised with e Berra deal that that move is taking a lot of heat off of Burke. Without that deal I think he would be far from appearing to be getting a "free ride" from fans.

[BACKCHECK!!!]

It's gotta be disappointment when you put that much work into orchestrating a 3 way and it doesn't materialize when you thought it was so close.

Oh man, I think we all know that pain.

[Aarongavey]

I do not get what Burke is saying. He is saying that it is important to not cave in on your demands for a player, that you have to stay firm on what you are asking for because he helps you to develop a reputation around the league. He also says that he caved on what he was demanding for Cammalleri and reduced his demands in response to the overall market for players.

So is he saying that it is important to stand firm on what you are demanding after you have caved and reduced your demand? Can you reduce your demand only once and still maintain a strong reputation with other GM's? How many times can you reduce your asking price before you look weak? These are questions that confuse me in regards to Burke's comments.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

I do not get what Burke is saying. He is saying that it is important to not cave in on your demands for a player, that you have to stay firm on what you are asking for because he helps you to develop a reputation around the league. He also says that he caved on what he was demanding for Cammalleri and reduced his demands in response to the overall market for players.

So is he saying that it is important to stand firm on what you are demanding after you have caved and reduced your demand? Can you reduce your demand only once and still maintain a strong reputation with other GM's? How many times can you reduce your asking price before you look weak? These are questions that confuse me in regards to Burke's comments.

His comments were pretty straight forward.

1) you have to be cognizant of the fact that markets move

2) you can't be a wimp that gets pushed around

If you don't have the balls to say no and walk away, you should NOT be at the table

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

I do not get what Burke is saying. He is saying that it is important to not cave in on your demands for a player, that you have to stay firm on what you are asking for because he helps you to develop a reputation around the league. He also says that he caved on what he was demanding for Cammalleri and reduced his demands in response to the overall market for players.

So is he saying that it is important to stand firm on what you are demanding after you have caved and reduced your demand? Can you reduce your demand only once and still maintain a strong reputation with other GM's? How many times can you reduce your asking price before you look weak? These are questions that confuse me in regards to Burke's comments.

What I got from it:

The asking price for Cammalleri was based on the asking price for Vanek and Moulson. When the latter's price dropped, he dropped his price accordingly.

Seperate to his asking price there was a line in the sand in terms of minimum value he wanted for Cammalleri. When the offers were below this minimum, he decided having Cammalleri for the rest of the season was worth more than what was being offered.

Now that may seem wrong to some people but I can understand the logic to it.

[Scoreface]

Don't know where else to post this. Posted originally in conversation in the Reto Berra thread. yeah, things can go a different direction fast. hehe. Maybe better in the BBF?

Anyway, my thoughts. Thanks for reading, folks. Hope you enjoyed Trade Deadline like I did!! A weird one, to echo some others..


Quote:
Originally Posted by Phanuthier
I'm kind of hoping Burke's plan B is to keep Cammalleri, then move off Hudler for good picks/prospects.




I think Burke may be waiting to see what happens with a certain young phenom in Gaudreau. He could've perhaps pulled the trigger on a Hudler deal, but there currently is no one else who fits his mould as a shifty playmaker.

So I think things hinge more around that, than what you suggest. Either way, we're talking about 3 diminutive forwards. The numbers game says 2 should probably go at some point.

Don't think it'll be Johnny, but we shall see. Burke should be committed to Ponoka if he dealt him before realizing his potential and preferring to hang on to Cammy and Hudler, IMO.

I think Burke knows to some degree how high his ceiling can be, and his picks in the upcoming drafts will to some extent focus on surrounding him with 'beef.' Maybe I'm going on a limb here, but some of his strategy in drafting in 2014 may center around this.

The kid could be a superstar. I really think Burke knows this and may parlay a signed Cammalleri and Hudler also. In Hudler's case he will probably hang onto once he has a better idea of what Johnny can bring at the pro level in Gaudreau, assuming he signs. Even if he busts (which there is a probability of course), he may still move Hudler. Neither case is in a vacuum I suppose.

I feel ablush about this kind of scenario. Because not only does it present all kinds of probabilities, but more that we may have a star on our hands. One of which many GM's salivate for.

Of course, just speculating a bit and also hoping too, like all of us! Haha

Edit- We also have Baertchi knocking on the door soon, so potentially him and Gaudreau as smallish top 6 forwards I'm sure is pushing the limit with Burke. We don't want a Rutherford situation in Carolina going forward.

This draft will be even more intriguing than 2013 with it's 3 first rounders IMO. Size and skill will probably be looked at as a MUST for the most part, Id figure.

[Scoreface]

I really want to know others thoughts on this. All of it is things I've thought of for awhile.

Should it go to another forum? Maybe the Johnny Hockey one. I can repost it there too, if it's worthwhile.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Burke basically just said what Tinordi said in the other thread, building organizational reputation in trades is worth something in future trades, let's others know you simply bend over cause that's whats available.

Is he correct though? Or does this attitude just leave you hanging on to your assets year after year? Personally, I think it's the latter. Other GMs aren't going to offer the moon for Hudler next deadline just because we didn't move Cammalleri this deadline... particularly not if Snow is still doing giveaways.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by SebC

Is he correct though? Or does this attitude just leave you hanging on to your assets year after year? Personally, I think it's the latter. Other GMs aren't going to offer the moon for Hudler next deadline just because we didn't move Cammalleri this deadline... particularly not if Snow is still doing giveaways.

Considering Burke moved two potenial UFA's this year I doubt it's the latter. Yeah, you're probably left with an asset sometimes but in Burke's mind that pays off for later deals. I tend to agree.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

What I got from it:

The asking price for Cammalleri was based on the asking price for Vanek and Moulson. When the latter's price dropped, he dropped his price accordingly.

Seperate to his asking price there was a line in the sand in terms of minimum value he wanted for Cammalleri. When the offers were below this minimum, he decided having Cammalleri for the rest of the season was worth more than what was being offered.

Now that may seem wrong to some people but I can understand the logic to it.

Absolutely.

I think Ottawa was probably the most in on cammalleri, with the other teams interested having cammalleri as plan B or C. Real dollars might have influenced Ottawa picking hemsky over cammalleri, but I think they went with who they thought was the better option or player for them which was hemsky.

After that, no one was going to bid up cammalleri to burke's minimum valuation.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Absolutely.

I think Ottawa was probably the most in on cammalleri, with the other teams interested having cammalleri as plan B or C. Real dollars might have influenced Ottawa picking hemsky over cammalleri, but I think they went with who they thought was the better option or player for them which was hemsky.

After that, no one was going to bid up cammalleri to burke's minimum valuation.

On top of that, I don't think other teams really wanted to use up their cap space on Cammalleri. They probably wanted to hold it open on the chance that Vanek/Moulson could be acquired. I bet if Vanek/Moulson get dealt an hour earlier, then the cap room is sunk cost anyways and there is a market for Cammalleri. Look at what LA had to do to make room (i.e. CLB eat salary, demote Vey) and ANA moved Penner for a 4th to make space.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

On top of that, I don't think other teams really wanted to use up their cap space on Cammalleri. They probably wanted to hold it open on the chance that Vanek/Moulson could be acquired. I bet if Vanek/Moulson get dealt an hour earlier, then the cap room is sunk cost anyways and there is a market for Cammalleri. Look at what LA had to do to make room (i.e. CLB eat salary, demote Vey) and ANA moved Penner for a 4th to make space.

I agree and Burke said as much in a couple of different ways today.

He said he knew yesterday the price for these guys was going to drop. And how these things aren't decided by opening your phone and proclaiming you are open for business on the morning of the deadline, it takes lots of lead up conversations. With the logjam and distractions, there wasn't time to react to what your nhl rivals were doing.

There was no time for gms to sit and stew while others loaded up, part of the reason Burke likes to do his moves early. That is part of what turned up values last year, a slower progression of trades prior to the deadline. Pittsburgh does this so Boston does that etc.

[Vinny01]

When Burke stated he did not want this organization to be known as one that will give players away it made me think. League wide for the past 4 years that's exactly what the organization is known for. Phaneuf, Jokinen were viewed as awful trades. Sutter's last biggish trade moving Ian White (one of the early favs of the Phaneuf deal) for Babchuk that looked pretty bad at first glance.

Feaster made the reputation worse with the Regehr, Iginla, Bouwmeester, Tanguay deals. Burke even stated it was a huge reason Feaster was let go. Now he is in charge of changing that reputation not giving Cammy away is part of it and getting a 2nd for Berra is another. In the long run that is worth more than a 3rd or 4th round pick

[Scoreface]

For sure Vinny, and that is what I was getting at.

Burke is all about maximizing value. While things can get to the boiling point with us fans, we need to also look at the bigger picture.

It is starting to get fun what that strange haired dude is thinking! I think this upcoming draft will tell much. Like I said, even though we don't have 3 firsts, it will be a huge signpost for the for the organization going forward. Not only in terms of picks. But the new guy coming in.

Futa from LA is my bet.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

When Burke stated he did not want this organization to be known as one that will give players away it made me think. League wide for the past 4 years that's exactly what the organization is known for. Phaneuf, Jokinen were viewed as awful trades. Sutter's last biggish trade moving Ian White (one of the early favs of the Phaneuf deal) for Babchuk that looked pretty bad at first glance.

Feaster made the reputation worse with the Regehr, Iginla, Bouwmeester, Tanguay deals. Burke even stated it was a huge reason Feaster was let go. Now he is in charge of changing that reputation not giving Cammy away is part of it and getting a 2nd for Berra is another. In the long run that is worth more than a 3rd or 4th round pick

Great post Vinny... Burke would be doing a bit of a disservice to his hire if he carried that on. Similar to how Calgarypuck gets really paranoid about a "losing culture" .... Burke may have found that Calgary is getting that reputation and saw that it was worth forgoing a mid-round pick to break that.

[Mr.Coffee]

to me it makes a lot of sense to establish the reputation that you can negotiate to a point, but teams thinking you're going to bend over because a guy is a UFA- you just can't let people have that kind of leverage on you. And it is WORTH potentially losing whatever value you are leaving on the table (what, a 3rd? who fataing cares?) to establish that reputation. I agree 100% with Burke on this one.

And for that matter, just about everything Burke says or does, from a purely asset management perspective, has made sense to me and I can understand where he's coming from. Most of all, I love that he has a plan and that he has a clear vision for what he wants the team to do.

Love Burke, the perfect guy for the job and I hope he doesn't find a GM unless that GM is razor sharp and has an excellent understanding of asset management and negotiation skills. I guarantee Iginla woulda been gone 2 years earlier if Burke was at the helm at the time.

No Craig Conroy doesn't strike me as that guy.

[CalgaryFan1988]

I don't think Conroy would make a good GM. He's too friendly with players.

Not a knock on Conroy, I just think it wouldn't suit his personality.