[News] Flames/Glencross looking at Extension

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by 868904

He wouldn't be the first guy to not waive. There is precedent. Families and life outside of hockey also come into the mix.

I've always thought that Glencross loves being an Albertan more than playing hockey. Not that there's anything wrong with that but from an asset management standpoint, I hope the Flames can get something good for him.

Sure, those things do come into play but not so much when the writing is on the wall that even if you won't move at that time you will be moving on in a couple months anyhow when your contract is up. There would be no benefit to Glencross not waiving at the deadline.

[BACKCHECK!!!]

Originally Posted by saillias

I don't know a thing about advanced stats. I know he's a frustrating player to watch, and the quote I bolded is in line with what I see when he plays.

By the way, your line about shooting percentage/goals is an incorrect assumption. Ovie always has low shooting percentages but he takes a TON of shots. A high shooting percentage usually means a guy is extremely skilled, or had a lucky season and is about to come back down to earth.

And as long as you've got a Leafs avatar no one cares what annoys you.

Glencross has one of the higher sustained career shooting percentages in the NHL. His baseline is to score 15+% of the time.

He's not going to 'come back to earth', he's been doing it for years.

[Finger Cookin]

Originally Posted by EVERLAST

Heave ho

Glencross needs to go!!!!

Pouty mcpoutersen....hes the new Bork.

Hell lets just flip him to the wings for Cleary

Gawd.....the love for Glennie, glen x ......eyeroll.

Has there ever been a more "Friday liquid lunch" post than this?

[hymarker]

I think he is worth 3.5 max. The guy is good when he tries, but that is the question ??

[jlh2640]

Originally Posted by hymarker

I think he is worth 3.5 max. The guy is good when he tries, but that is the question ??

When he decides to try and when he is healthy

[sun]

Originally Posted by EVERLAST

Heave ho

Glencross needs to go!!!!

Pouty mcpoutersen....hes the new Bork.

Hell lets just flip him to the wings for Cleary

Gawd.....the love for Glennie, glen x ......eyeroll.

Is this an attempt at poetry?

[gargamel]

Originally Posted by MissTeeks

Hmm:

“@BoomerAndRhett: Conroy on Glencross extension: "If he's healthy he can score 30. I know Brad wants to see where Glenny is in-season, then we'll talk."”

Hopefully that's just a nice way of saying that Brad want to see where the young forwards are in-season. I like that the young guys aren't being handed roster spots that they haven't earned, but giving old guys multi-year contracts with either no-trade clauses or untradeable salaries makes it so young guys are being kept out of the lineup even if they're already better than the veterans. It doesn't make sense to extend Glencross until we see how the young guys are progressing, and even then I wouldn't give him more than a year if he insists on a NTC.

[dying4acup]

The thing with Glencross is, scoring or not, he plays a big, tough game. He bring scoring, speed, offense, defense. There's not much he can't do. There's a lot of vets if send packing before him. And at a low (up until now) cost. Of course there's a lot I don't know. Things like lockerroom presence, off-ice work habits. But keep in mind, a year ago there was talk about him being captain.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by gargamel

...I like that the young guys aren't being handed roster spots that they haven't earned, but giving old guys multi-year contracts with either no-trade clauses or untradeable salaries makes it so young guys are being kept out of the lineup even if they're already better than the veterans...

I wouldn't worry much about this at all. If there is a young player at camp that is clearly better than an older player, and who is going to make a significant difference to the team's success, they will find a way to get him into the lineup. Last year, there were no foreseen plans to have Monahan spend the season in Calgary, and yet he was there.

Treliving is now on record several times stating that no player ever suffered for having spent additional time in the AHL. By his estimation, it's not a problem if a young player has to wait a little longer to be an NHL regular.

[gargamel]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I wouldn't worry much about this at all. If there is a young player at camp that is clearly better than an older player, and who is going to make a significant difference to the team's success, they will find a way to get him into the lineup. Last year, there were no foreseen plans to have Monahan spend the season in Calgary, and yet he was there.

I hope you're right, but I'm skeptical. I fully expect Gaudreau (and maybe Sven) and Wotherspoon (and maybe Sieloff) to outplay Raymond and Engelland at camp and in the pre-season, but I don't think there's any way that we're going to put our newly signed free-agent acquisitions on waivers to make room for more deserving guys.

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Treliving is now on record several times stating that no player ever suffered for having spent additional time in the AHL. By his estimation, it's not a problem if a young player has to wait a little longer to be an NHL regular.

I know that's Treliving's theory, but I'm not convinced that it's accurate. I don't want the guys to come up before they're ready, but we need to make sure that we can make room for them when they are. It's a balancing act, and long or even medium-term contracts for older players only complicate things.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by gargamel

I hope you're right, but I'm skeptical. I fully expect Gaudreau (and maybe Sven) and Wotherspoon (and maybe Sieloff) to outplay Raymond and Engelland at camp and in the pre-season, but I don't think there's any way that we're going to put our newly signed free-agent acquisitions on waivers to make room for more deserving guys.

For guys like Gaudreau, Wotherspoon, and Sieloff, this is not an issue, since only one of these players has played a season in the AHL, and he is likely not to suffer for another year there. Baertschi played his way onto the team last year, and I would expect it is likely that he does so again this year. So if all four end up playing in the minors with Engelland and Raymond in the NHL all year, this doesn't really have any sort of negative impact. Even Baertschi is still a work in progress with room to grow.

But in the end, all of these players are still young enough that this shouldn't become an issue for at least another year. Since the UFAs signed this year were all given short deals, I would suggest that management is working under the proviso that several of these young players will be on the team in two years. Sieloff will only be 23-years-old in the final season of Engelland's deal. Still very young, and still with lots of room to grow for a defenseman.

[gargamel]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

But in the end, all of these players are still young enough that this shouldn't become an issue for at least another year. Since the UFAs signed this year were all given short deals, I would suggest that management is working under the proviso that several of these young players will be on the team in two years. Sieloff will only be 23-years-old in the final season of Engelland's deal. Still very young, and still with lots of room to grow for a defenseman.

I agree, and I'm not overly concerned at this point, but I just don't think it makes sense to add Glencross to the list of veterans on multi-year deals who will be blocking young guys from earning their way onto the team.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by gargamel

I agree, and I'm not overly concerned at this point, but I just don't think it makes sense to add Glencross to the list of veterans on multi-year deals who will be blocking young guys from earning their way onto the team.

Who are the veterans on multi-year deals blocking young guys? We only have 3 veteran forwards signed beyond 2016 and one of them is Bollig who is irrelevant for the purposes of this discussion since he's a 4th line guy and completely expendable if need be. The other two are Raymond and Stajan, who like Glencross, do not require specific spots in the lineup and can be put anywhere in the lineup. There are lot of spots that we only wish our young guys can eventually fill.

[gargamel]

Originally Posted by FAN

Who are the veterans on multi-year deals blocking young guys? We only have 3 veteran forwards signed beyond 2016 and one of them is Bollig who is irrelevant for the purposes of this discussion since he's a 4th line guy and completely expendable if need be. The other two are Raymond and Stajan, who like Glencross, do not require specific spots in the lineup and can be put anywhere in the lineup. There are lot of spots that we only wish our young guys can eventually fill.

For the 2015-16 season, unless we're relying on other teams to take dead weight off of our hands, counting on injuries or planning to bury veterans in the AHL, our lineup will look something like:

Glencross (if he's resigned) - Monahan - Hudler
OPEN - Backlund (assuming he's resigned) - Colbourne
Raymond - Stajan - Jones
Bollig - Bouma (assuming he's resigned) - OPEN

Giordano - Brodie (assuming he's resigned)
Smid - Wideman
Engelland - Russell

Basically, assuming that Backlund, Bouma and Brodie are in the long-term plans, there are only guaranteed to be 2 open spots for skaters in the next 2 years if we re-sign Glencross, and one of those spots will almost certainly be filled by McGrattan or a replacement face-puncher. When we have Bennett, Gaudreau, Baertschi, Reinhart, Knight, Agostino and Granlund all knocking on the door, I'd rather not re-sign Glencross so that one more young guy can get a chance to play.

You are right that things open up in 2016-17, but I don't know that our prospects (or the fans) would be best-served by waiting that long.

[dissentowner]

Basically, assuming that Backlund, Bouma and Brodie are in the long-term plans, there are only guaranteed to be 2 open spots for skaters in the next 2 years if we re-sign Glencross, and one of those spots will almost certainly be filled by McGrattan or a replacement face-puncher. .

Brodie for sure but I don't see Bouma as a certainty going forward and I still think Backlund will be used as trade bait in the near future. I think both him and Stajan will be gone two years from now at the longest.

[ForeverFlameFan]

There are always injuries that can occur, so I guarantee we'll see some young player call ups. Glencross tends to get injured, and as some people mentioned, I too wouldn't mind signing the guy again because 1) he gets injured and that gives young kids a chance to prove themselves, we got to see a lot of that last year. 2) Glencross is probably our best scorer on the team now that Cammy is gone. When Cammy was with the Canadiens, Glencross did pretty well as the best LW scorer. Maybe he thought he didn't have to do as much because Cammy came first? I don't know.

I think we should resign the guy to a 2-3 year deal. If we don't see improvement within this year or the next, I think we should trade him while he still will have value, even if it's to Edmonton.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by gargamel

For the 2015-16 season, unless we're relying on other teams to take dead weight off of our hands, counting on injuries or planning to bury veterans in the AHL, our lineup will look something like:

Glencross (if he's resigned) - Monahan - Hudler
OPEN - Backlund (assuming he's resigned) - Colbourne
Raymond - Stajan - Jones
Bollig - Bouma (assuming he's resigned) - OPEN

...

Basically, assuming that Backlund, Bouma and Brodie are in the long-term plans, there are only guaranteed to be 2 open spots for skaters in the next 2 years if we re-sign Glencross, and one of those spots will almost certainly be filled by McGrattan or a replacement face-puncher. When we have Bennett, Gaudreau, Baertschi, Reinhart, Knight, Agostino and Granlund all knocking on the door, I'd rather not re-sign Glencross so that one more our prospects (or the fans) would be best-served by waiting that long.

Well they are waiting and see how the season goes and you forget that the team will likely carry 2 more forwards and trades happen. We have a new GM. Treliving may have different ideas about the prospects we have. Some guys will have make it or break it years. Reinhart and Baertshi are exempt from waivers for another year. The chances are Reinhart and Baertschi don't establish themselves this season, it's possible that they aren't brought back.

Besides, I really don't see the Flames starting a season with Hudler, Baertschi, Grandlund, and Gaudreau on the roster.

[Gaskal]

Realistically we're expecting only 1-2 spots open for a rookie to make the team out of training camp this year anyway.

Glencross probably won't be re-signed, David Jones is likely buyout candidate, a huge chunk of our prospects are either AHL, AHL-ineligible, need more time in junior, or finishing college. No reason to worry.

[-TC-]

Originally Posted by MissTeeks

Hmm:

“@BoomerAndRhett: Conroy on Glencross extension: "If he's healthy he can score 30. I know Brad wants to see where Glenny is in-season, then we'll talk."”

that's the right answer...

Glencross needs to have a rebound season and stay healthy. If he can do those things, then I think you start the conversation in Feb/Mar 2015. That gives you time to look at the status of his game and still negotiate a deal without time pressures.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by -TC-

that's the right answer...

Glencross needs to have a rebound season and stay healthy. If he can do those things, then I think you start the conversation in Feb/Mar 2015. That gives you time to look at the status of his game and still negotiate a deal without time pressures.

I agree with your post, but it has to start long before then - more like after New Year's because you need to keep the trade deadline open as an option