[Trade] Hudler traded to Florida for 2016 2nd + 2018 4th round picks

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

E. Staal

Almost got my ninja edit in in time...

[Hackey]

After seeing the deals made today I think it's quite clear that good offers were not on the table. Glad we dealt Hudler when we did and glad we were able to get what we did. A lot of big names didn't move today and I'm very pleased Hudler wasn't one of them.

[Mattman]

^Treliving and the management team did a great job at reading the market for forwards. Even if it seemed like a poor return on Hudler the Russel trade compensates for it.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by wireframe

Hudler and Stempniak got roughly the same return. I would not have believe you if you told me that last year. What a weird turn.

I like the return on Hudler and I think Hudler is better than Stempniak. So I guess that means that I think the bruins overpaid for Stempniak. Just weird.

Stempniak is more versatile if you ask me...would rather have him in my bottom six than Hudler

also has better numbers this season

[Hackey]

Exactly. I think certain intangibles become a lot more valuable for a playoff run. Jiri is so one dimensional if he isn't scoring he's basically useless out there. He just wasn't a high demand rental and we're lucky we got what we did. Very glad were not in a Vrbata or Eriksson situation. Or worse a Vrbata AND Hamhuis situation. We did pretty good with Jiri and Russell all things considered.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Exactly. I think certain intangibles become a lot more valuable for a playoff run. Jiri is so one dimensional if he isn't scoring he's basically useless out there. He just wasn't a high demand rental and we're lucky we got what we did. Very glad were not in a Vrbata or Eriksson situation. Or worse a Vrbata AND Hamhuis situation. We did pretty good with Jiri and Russell all things considered.

I would not say Hudler is that one dimensional, especially compared to a Stempniak. In hindsight, looks like Flames got an acceptable return for Hudler. The Devils fleeced the Bruins in the Stempniak trade.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Stempniak isn't one dimensional. He isn't half the scorer Jiri is but his game is more well rounded IMO.

[Saqe]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

Stempniak isn't one dimensional. He isn't half the scorer Jiri is but his game is more well rounded IMO.

Isn't Stempniak pretty invisible in the playoffs? At least that's how I remember him.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Saqe

Isn't Stempniak pretty invisible in the playoffs? At least that's how I remember him.

I don't think I've ever seen him play in the playoffs tbh. From what I remember of him when he was a Flame, he's faster and grittier than Jiri, and better in his own zone. He can actually lay guys out sometimes too. He struggles to score 20 goals and 40 points though and that's usually easy for Hudler. I know if I'm the GM of a playoff team, I likely already have a solid top 6 and Jiri is a 2nd line winger at best on most playoff teams. Looking around the league, I would say Hudler fits as the 3rd to 5th best winger on most of them. If the playoff team is already good at scoring (10th or better) it really kills a lot of the incentive to get a guy like Hudler because he doesn't do anything else for you.

Stempniak is more of a 3rd liner who can play up and down your lineup if needed, he fits much better on an already deep team.

I think BT did very well with the Hudler trade all things considered.

[Saqe]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

I don't think I've ever seen him play in the playoffs tbh. From what I remember of him when he was a Flame, he's faster and grittier than Jiri, and better in his own zone. He can actually lay guys out sometimes too. He struggles to score 20 goals and 40 points though and that's usually easy for Hudler. I know if I'm the GM of a playoff team, I likely already have a solid top 6 and Jiri is a 2nd line winger at best on most playoff teams. Looking around the league, I would say Hudler fits as the 3rd to 5th best winger on most of them. If the playoff team is already good at scoring (10th or better) it really kills a lot of the incentive to get a guy like Hudler because he doesn't do anything else for you.

Hudler probably will play on the third line for Florida or whatever you want to call it, their first three lines play the same amount. They don't really have a third line.

Either way, good trade.

[Enoch Root]

Some people are arguing that Stempniak is more valuable than Hudler now? Come on, let's keep it real.

On a more rational note, one of the things Treliving said was that he thought the market for forwards was weakening, so he pulled the trigger early.

Turns out he nailed it.

And, regardless of what you think of the return, this fact sheds an even more positive light on it.

He correctly gauged the forward market, and then knocked one out of the park with a defenseman.

Well played, good sir!

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I would not say Hudler is that one dimensional, especially compared to a Stempniak. In hindsight, looks like Flames got an acceptable return for Hudler. The Devils fleeced the Bruins in the Stempniak trade.

He isn't phsyical, he isn't a faceoff wizard, he isn't a shutdown guy, he doesn't have speed, he doesn't block a lot of shots, he doesn't create space or have a strong cycle game, he isn't really effective lower in your line up. I just don't really see how he impacts a playoff game very much if he isn't in your top 6 scoring. Seems pretty one dimensional to me.

[IgiTang]

I truly believe Chicago destroyed the market.

The optics appear as though Chicago beat everyone to the punch in loading up and other teams GM's figured there is no way to beat the Hawks this year so why give up assets when it's unlikely you'll beat Chi or Was for the cup.

So playoff teams stood pat and kept their first rounders.

With that in mind, BT nailed this trade in terms of timing and Max return. Many GM's git caught flat footed and lost out on the minimal deals left to be had. Treliving in my opinion, was the only GM who actually made something happen. (Outside of Stan Bowman, of course)

[Fire in the disco]

Financial Analyst chiming in here. Enoch Root is correct with most of what I read. Especially regarding Forward Contracts, also it's true that the Flames would have likely budgeted for the fiscal year prior to the start of the season (depending on their reporting calendar) so if they did in fact hedge at that time they have significantly reduced their risk of foreign exchange exposure. Also they may have hedged their rate as far as 18 months out (lots of oil companies did do this last year, they are the ones who haven't done massive restructuring). However if they did not foresee the collapse of the CAD and did not hedge this would not help them out today as the banks generally give you a fixed rate at slightly lower than the daily noon trading rate.

[Sylvanfan]

Seeing the end result I do think Treliving acted at the right time. There does appear to be a consistent thought process in place with his dealings. Ultimately the individual deals may vary, but if he has a plan and process and holds true to that he will have his best shot at success. So I'm happy they dealt Hudler and can see this as a consistent action in the plan. None of this Feasterville waffling back and forth

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Fire in the disco

Especially regarding Forward Contracts, also it's true that the Flames would have likely budgeted for the fiscal year prior to the start of the season (depending on their reporting calendar) so if they did in fact hedge at that time they have significantly reduced their risk of foreign exchange exposure.

Thing is, the C$ is at just about the same level now as it was last summer. And to return to my earlier point, a loss of revenues cannot be hedged. If people aren't buying game-day tickets at full price, or aren't spending money at the concessions, currency hedging can't fix that.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Thing is, the C$ is at just about the same level now as it was last summer. And to return to my earlier point, a loss of revenues cannot be hedged. If people aren't buying game-day tickets at full price, or aren't spending money at the concessions, currency hedging can't fix that.

Not sure where you are going with this. They are still selling out, and I would imagine that beer sales can't tell the difference between wins and losses.

Of course revenues aren't guaranteed, but they are what they are.

And the team operates in Canadian dollars. Canadian dollars do not weaken for someone living in/operating in Canadian dollars.

The only currency impact is an appreciation of the USD on some of the expenses (salaries). And that can be hedged.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

Stempniak isn't one dimensional. He isn't half the scorer Jiri is but his game is more well rounded IMO.

yet he has more points

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Not sure where you are going with this. They are still selling out, and I would imagine that beer sales can't tell the difference between wins and losses.

Beer sales can sure as hell tell the difference between a good economy and a bad one. It isn't the team's record that is damaging the bottom line this season, but the fans' disposable income.

Of course revenues aren't guaranteed, but they are what they are.

Yes, and what they are is declining – in ancillary, day-to-day matters first; next year, probably, where it will really hurt, in season-ticket sales. This makes the owners particularly keen not to take on unnecessary expense. They will therefore be reluctant to retain salary on trades, even if they have no actual policy against it. Which was my whole damned point to begin with.

And the team operates in Canadian dollars. Canadian dollars do not weaken for someone living in/operating in Canadian dollars.

Which is why hedging is irrelevant in this context. I was arguing against Enoch Root's claim that all the team's financial worries were solved by hedging. Hedging can't solve a crappy economy.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Beer sales can sure as hell tell the difference between a good economy and a bad one. It isn't the team's record that is damaging the bottom line this season, but the fans' disposable income.



Yes, and what they are is declining – in ancillary, day-to-day matters first; next year, probably, where it will really hurt, in season-ticket sales. This makes the owners particularly keen not to take on unnecessary expense. They will therefore be reluctant to retain salary on trades, even if they have no actual policy against it. Which was my whole damned point to begin with.



Which is why hedging is irrelevant in this context. I was arguing against Enoch Root's claim that all the team's financial worries were solved by hedging. Hedging can't solve a crappy economy.

To the bold: come on, you can do better than that.

1) do you have any evidence that their revenues are down in any meaningful way this season? I have heard no such thing.

2) regarding next year's season ticket sales: I guess we'll see. But that doesn't impact this year's budget (other than expecting tighter times ahead, which they have no gauge on yet with respect to ST sales)

3) to your main point that alleged declining revenues will stop them from retaining salary: your initial claim was that revenues are down so they don't want to retain salary.

At no point have you shown that revenues are actually down.

And expenses are actually down. That was my point.

Hudler and Russell make $6.8M combined this year. Jones' salary washes with Backstrom's. So all they picked up was Jokipakka's $900K.

That's a drop of $5.9M x 40/186 which is approximately $1.27M.

Retaining half of Hudler's contract would have meant that they still saved about $840K USD.

That's a lot of beer sales you think they have lost.