[Signing] Flames re-sign Stone (3 yrs, $3.5 mil AAV)

[djsFlames]

I hope these moves today catch the attention of free agents that were thinking Calgary was a decent destination, but still weren't quite sold. In fact I think that may be the angle Brad is taking by being so active today.

It helps to show that guys who played here even in limited roles that could slot better and make more elsewhere both like and believe in the team here enough to take pay cuts without even hitting free agency. I think it speaks volumes.

The team is a RW away from being a serious threat in the west on paper. I hope one of those potential RWs are taking note..

[Stanley]

Originally Posted by btimbit

I think having such a stable D group allows the Flames to play the top guys less, maybe have some gas left in the tank come playoff time. Makes sense given Gully's comments this morning

Exactly. I'd rather have this than bringing in some scrub D at $1.5M.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Yes, as you've said... and as has been repeatedly pointed out to you, making several good decisions does not make your subsequent bad decisions any less bad. Having good contracts in your top four provides you with an opportunity to use those savings in a way that makes your team better. Doing this is a waste of that opportunity, and is therefore something that should be frowned upon.

I would have said "spend the money on forwards". But if you really absolutely had to have another defenceman, take that 3.5 million and put it towards Del Zotto or Franson or hell, spend half that much on Patrick Wiercioch. All of whom are much better at hockey than Michael Stone is.

All teams have one or two of these overpayments, for sure. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't try to avoid them.

The difference is the organization and fans (who actually watched Stone) like him a lot, and think this solidifies our blue-line and puts us in a very good position if there's injuries. It's great depth.

No one here cares about your biased, skewed agenda to spew stats to defame the player.

He's arguably a top four on many teams, and is going to play #5 for us. When we add up our entire top five, it's a very favourable position to be in.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Well that didn't happen. Instead we got a top 4 dman at market value or slightly below market value

No we didn't. We got a #5 signed for to long and to much. It's Smid 2.0.

[sempuki]

Originally Posted by Parallex

I don't think it's possible for someone else to get how much I loath this deal. Mark my words this is a Brouwer contract except on the backend.

No, no. We ****ing get it already.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by getbak

Think about this...

• 2017-18: Hamonic & Stone = $7.35 million, combined age: 54
• 2016-17: Wideman & Engelland = $8.17 million, combined age: 67

Top 5 gets better and cheaper.

You could tack Smid onto that as well. Flames were still paying him and he still counted against the cap even if the flames were able to squeeze some replacement dollars out.

[yourbestfriend]

This signing is also good for minutes utilization.
If you have a confidence in your 3rd pairing and can put them out there more, you can distribute your minutes more evenly over all pairings. A few less minutes for the top pairing each game does wonders over an 82 game season.

Great signing.

[Stay Golden]

Was a fan of Stone, this is awesome news. I thought Stone was really key for the Flames making the playoffs. He added toughness on D and was smart with his own zone desions.
Treliving is having quite a past 2 weeks.

Getting Stone signed early is a win for the Flames!

[TheFlamesVan]

Originally Posted by Parallex

No we didn't. We got a #5 signed for to long and to much. It's Smid 2.0.

You are referencing what would have been a great signing if not for injury problems.

[Jbo]

Need to think that Smith and Lack are absolutely pumped to get going with the last weeks work on the blue line.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Based on market value for top 4 dmen of his age this is nowhere near an overpayment.

I agree, except that he is a bottom pairing defenceman, not a top four. If you play him like a top four, you are likely to get third pairing results in those minutes. He could prove this prediction wrong, but there's no evidence of it to date.

If anything you look at the Russell deal and this is a slight underpayment.

The Russell deal is a joke. This is damning by faint praise.

Watch what Alzer and co sign for tomorrow and then come back and tell me we overpaid.

I totally agree that Karl Alzner is also likely to be substantially overpaid based on his reputation and the general noises being made about what he's asking for. So now you've named two defencemen that are likely to get bad contracts this year. You're correct. That doesn't make this contract any better.

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by Stanley

Exactly. I'd rather have this than bringing in some scrub D at $1.5M.

But don't you get it, Stone is that scrub. He's objectively the worst. When he plays hockey the other team scores a lot and the team he plays for loses. Sometimes he even scores on his own team because he's less a hockey player and more a vaudevillian villian! He's even growing a Snidely Whiplash moustache and everything.

We just fired 3.5 million dollars a year into the sun. This is the worst thing to happen to anyone since that time something else awful happened. I need a good cry.

[icecube]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Adding Williams likely means bye-bye Backlund though

[sempuki]

A bit much for borderline 4-5, but he would have gotten more on the open market, and you can't underestimate the effect of stabilizing the bottom pairing. We had to go out an get Smid the last time we had such an unreliable bottom pair. There's a certain confidence knowing that when your bottom pairing is out, it won't be a **** show. And a better D improves the odds our G can perform to their historical capacity.

[Samonadreau]

We have a 5th and 2 7ths in the draft now next year. Did i get that right?

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Parallex

Sure... but 3.5x3!! Young guys don't stay young sign a vet for a 1 year contract then you don't have two rookies next year.

Treliving ####ed up royally here.

Pretty easy to trade defencemen if we ever have the fantastic problem of having too many of them. If you sign contending depth you go do it. You don't wait around hoping your prospects turn out. If they turn out then great, we'll have amazing assets to move.

You do realize we don't suddenly lose our good defense prospects if there's vets ahead of them? They'll still have value to the organization

Your reaction is over the top.

[IrishSpring2013]

Originally Posted by Parallex

No we didn't. We got a #5 signed for to long and to much. It's Smid 2.0.

michael stone.. Equals... Smid...??
Please, relax... Take a deep breath, log out and enjoy your long weekend...

[Ashasx]

CapFriendly‏ @CapFriendly
#Flames re-signing Michael Stone prior to 07/01, means Arizona will now also get Calgary's 5th RD pick in 2018 as part of the trade package.

It's only a 5th, but why wouldn't we have waited 12 hours?

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

I agree, except that he is a bottom pairing defenceman, not a top four.

According to you, a bitter fan of another team who refused to answer how much you actually watched him play.

You use statistics to speak in absolutes, and that's beyond ignorant.

He's arguably a #4 d-man, who we will deploy as a #5 with more limited minutes, that can step up into the top four in the event of an injury a lot better than would be the case if we didn't sign him.

[Stanley]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Yes, as you've said... and as has been repeatedly pointed out to you, making several good decisions does not make your subsequent bad decisions any less bad. Having good contracts in your top four provides you with an opportunity to use those savings in a way that makes your team better. Doing this is a waste of that opportunity, and is therefore something that should be frowned upon.

I would have said "spend the money on forwards". But if you really absolutely had to have another defenceman, take that 3.5 million and put it towards Del Zotto or Franson or hell, spend half that much on Patrick Wiercioch. All of whom are much better at hockey than Michael Stone is.

All teams have one or two of these overpayments, for sure. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't try to avoid them.

Del Zotto or Franson? Really? I don't get the love for Cody "turnovers" Franson.