If the Flames can't find a trade partner for Wideman, should they buy him out? - Page 4 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Cleveland Steam Whistle · 10-15-2016, 12:46 AM

An expiring aging D-man who won't be on this team after this year is the least of our concerns. I much more concerned that our recently extended and now tied for highest paid player looks like a snail / pylon out there every time our chief rivals best player is on the ice. Doesn't bode well for shutting that player down for the next six years or so.

Karl · 10-15-2016, 01:39 AM

The game of hockey is passing Wideman by more and more with each passing game, and quickly too.

The Original FFIV · 10-15-2016, 07:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dion

Let him sit in the press box for the rest of the season.

I really would have liked to been a fly on the wall during the exit interviews. I would hope that treliving would have let Dennis know that he wasn't in the teams plans moving forward and if he would submit a list of teams that he would accept a trade to. If he was militant and said no, I have a nmc and wish to remain, I don't know why he wasn't bought out. Yes, big hit for owners but paying him approx 3.5m to eff off is better than paying him 5.25m to sit in press box.

He's just a dumb slow hockey player at this point and is responsible for the letestu goal. I agree, if owners weren't prepared to buy him out and he's not willing to waive nmc, then sit him and put kulak or someone else out there who isn't a liability. Might also get us some cred with the officials too. To a degree, having wideman on our roster is our third goalie this year. IE something that should have been dealt with in the off season but lingered into the season and is a distraction.

TheoFleury · 10-15-2016, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Original FFIV

I really would have liked to been a fly on the wall during the exit interviews. I would hope that treliving would have let Dennis know that he wasn't in the teams plans moving forward and if he would submit a list of teams that he would accept a trade to. If he was militant and said no, I have a nmc and wish to remain, I don't know why he wasn't bought out. Yes, big hit for owners but paying him approx 3.5m to eff off is better than paying him 5.25m to sit in press box.

He's just a dumb slow hockey player at this point and is responsible for the letestu goal. I agree, if owners weren't prepared to buy him out and he's not willing to waive nmc, then sit him and put kulak or someone else out there who isn't a liability. Might also get us some cred with the officials too. To a degree, having wideman on our roster is our third goalie this year. IE something that should have been dealt with in the off season but lingered into the season and is a distraction.

I could see it being even worse than that. What if they won't allow Wideman to be a healthy scratch? Some owners are weird about that kind of stuff. They could view it as wasted money if he sits even though it's addition by subtraction on the ice.

kyuss275 · 10-15-2016, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheoFleury

I could see it being even worse than that. What if they won't allow Wideman to be a healthy scratch? Some owners are weird about that kind of stuff. They could view it as wasted money if he sits even though it's addition by subtraction on the ice.

Wideman has already been a healthy scratch playing under Hartley.

TheoFleury · 10-15-2016, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyuss275

Wideman has already been a healthy scratch playing under Hartley.

At this point, what is probably needed is for Wideman to be a healthy scratch for 30-50 games out of 82. It's a lot different than a one time thing to send a message. Wideman doesn't need a message at this point, he's a liability at 5v5 or 4v4. It's no longer good enough that he's decent on the PP if he can't keep up during the rest of the game. It sucks, but father time comes for us all. Honestly I think he will be forced into retirement after this year.

At this point, Wideman needs to sit so the team can get better. I'm not sure the owners can (or want to) reconcile that with parking 5.25m in the press box for most of the season. We shall see, but if Kulak goes down we have our answer imo.

442scotty · 10-15-2016, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frequitude

Never trade an NHL caliber defensemen too early in the season, even if you don't need him. Someone will need one eventually (maybe even yourself) so the demand for that type of asset will grow throughout the season.

Reminds me of the Toni Lydman situation right before 2005. We didn't really need him so Sutter traded him to Buffalo for a measly 3rd. Sure enough a month or two in we either sustained some injuries on the blue line and wished we had him or other teams did and we wished we had him to trade (forget which).

The problem is, he's no longer an NHL quality defenceman. Park him in the rafters. He looks like he's somewhat trying and probably would love to get bought out so he can get on with retirement

Fire · 10-15-2016, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheoFleury

I could see it being even worse than that. What if they won't allow Wideman to be a healthy scratch? Some owners are weird about that kind of stuff. They could view it as wasted money if he sits even though it's addition by subtraction on the ice.

You have to use common sense. Why would the owners give two craps if Wideman is a healthy scratch or not? Would they prefer to pay him to play and lose more games or prefer to pay him to be a healthy scratch and win more games. Which result could possibly result in more money for the owners?

Finger Cookin · 10-15-2016, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Original FFIV

To a degree, having wideman on our roster is our third goalie this year. IE something that should have been dealt with in the off season but lingered into the season and is a distraction.

I don't get the sense that any of the players are distracted by Wideman being around. Fans, sure. But teammates? I'm skeptical.

AcGold · 10-15-2016, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

I don't get the sense that any of the players are distracted by Wideman being around. Fans, sure. But teammates? I'm skeptical.

I'm not. The guy has negativity all over his face permanently, he looks like a sad sack moper. Such a thing bleeds over to everyone as it always will in a work environment. One of the highest paid but least effective people on the team with a big dark cloud hanging over his head.

You're crazy if you think the team isn't effected by that, they are humans not robots.

Goriders · 10-15-2016, 01:24 PM

The plain truth is that Wideman is now too slow for the current NHL pace.

He always has been on the slower side but used to be able to make up for it with good hands and positioning. Now he's just a good shot on the PP.

They need to replace him with someone with some more foot speed. In general the Oilers exposed that problem with respect to most of our defenders. That's why they've taken so many penalties in my opinion.

There's a time in everyone's career where their skills drop off a cliff. I think He's there now. Surprised he made it out of TC.

CliffFletcher · 10-15-2016, 01:38 PM

If Wideman continues to dress regularly it will be clear that Flames management is pursuing some agenda other than dressing the best lineup every night.

Reaper · 10-15-2016, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

He single handily caused two breakaways today.

*single handedly

4X4 · 10-15-2016, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Original FFIV

I really would have liked to been a fly on the wall during the exit interviews. I would hope that treliving would have let Dennis know that he wasn't in the teams plans moving forward and if he would submit a list of teams that he would accept a trade to. If he was militant and said no, I have a nmc and wish to remain, I don't know why he wasn't bought out. Yes, big hit for owners but paying him approx 3.5m to eff off is better than paying him 5.25m to sit in press box.

He's just a dumb slow hockey player at this point and is responsible for the letestu goal. I agree, if owners weren't prepared to buy him out and he's not willing to waive nmc, then sit him and put kulak or someone else out there who isn't a liability. Might also get us some cred with the officials too. To a degree, having wideman on our roster is our third goalie this year. IE something that should have been dealt with in the off season but lingered into the season and is a distraction.

The Flames should have given him the $3.5M kthxbyeout the first day it was available. The guy blatantly and unapologetically drilled a ref. I doubt the refs will hold it agains the Flames, although, these first couple of games are a bit suspect, but as a professional organization, Wideman should have been gone on day one of the buyout window. It sends two messages: The Flames will not put up with actions like that, and the Flames respect the officials, and will not have players like that on their team.

The fact that he f'n sucks is such a convenient extra reason to have done what I'm saying. He's Marchment to me. Should not be wearing a Flames jersey.

Also, he still should sit one more game on his 20 games. Clown.

Fire · 10-15-2016, 08:06 PM

A Wideman buyout would have resulted in a 2 million cap hit next season. I think the Flames made the right decision deciding to grin and bear it for this season. They should have a better chance for the playoffs next year and the 2 million could come in handy.

The Original FFIV · 10-15-2016, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fire

A Wideman buyout would have resulted in a 2 million cap hit next season. I think the Flames made the right decision deciding to grin and bear it for this season. They should have a better chance for the playoffs next year and the 2 million could come in handy.

But...but...we could have used that cap space to sign Russell this season

shadowlord · 10-15-2016, 08:53 PM

Wideman was scratched in game #2 of the 2014-2015 season; and then went on to put a career season. I can't remember which hockey report/commentator said that the scratch motivated him. Maybe we can hope for something similar.

Karl · 10-15-2016, 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shadowlord

Wideman was scratched in game #2 of the 2014-2015 season; and then went on to put a career season. I can't remember which hockey report/commentator said that the scratch motivated him. Maybe we can hope for something similar.

Ummm, I highly doubt it. Back in 2014-15 he could still somewhat skate reasonably. He is clearly not even that player anymore that he was even 2 years ago. He's lost about 2 or 3 strides since then, and he can no longer make up for his now painful slowness with good stick work and/or positioning.

The game is passing Wideman by quickly now. He's about done. He can barely move anymore. Age has caught up to him.

The Original FFIV · 10-15-2016, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shadowlord

Wideman was scratched in game #2 of the 2014-2015 season; and then went on to put a career season. I can't remember which hockey report/commentator said that the scratch motivated him. Maybe we can hope for something similar.

We can only hope for 79 more scratches at this point.

shadowlord · 10-15-2016, 09:14 PM

Yeah, I know it was a long shot, but I was hoping history could repeat itself. I don't see him getting benched for the rest of the season. We're going to be forced to play him at some point...