Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild GM
Does he not have Calgary no his no trade list? If so - unlikely he would sign here.
I think that's something we should be aware of. Calgary is likely amongst the least preferred free agent destinations now in part due to the organization instability that the arena issue is creating.
|
Disagree here.
I do think that the arena is a point of consideration, but not very big. Having a nice practice facility and other luxuries are definitely things to consider that appeal to players (just listen to Iginla talk about the Igloo, for instance).
However, players usually pick their destinations from the following list in this usual order:
1) Money
2) Chance to win
3) Opportunity
4) Location
Every other factor is probably just 'a nice to have'.
Players will always follow the money, but are willing to take a bit less for a legitimate chance to win. They also go to a team where they won't be pushed down the roster (like a top 6 forward knowingly sign somewhere for reduced ice-time), and in some cases, they will take a bit less to play with a premier player (maybe not take less, but will choose that team over others if the money is the same).
Location is something that some teams either have or don't. NYR are going to continue attracting the best free agents. Winnipeg is going to continue to have the most trouble. However, if Winnipeg suddenly goes and makes the finals, I think they will have an easier time attracting top talent without having to overpay for them.
I think Calgary's chances of landing free agents without overpaying (you can get anyone you want almost, as long as you are willing to offer them a ridiculous, crippling contract) will be dictated by their on-ice success. We have seen it firsthand ourselves when Calgary had to overpay for middling players in the 90's and early 2000's, but after making that cup run, was probably one of the premier landing spots for a couple of seasons.
One only has to look at the Oilers. They couldn't get anyone to sign with them due to their reputation on how they treat players, their location and their chances to win. They managed to sign Lucic for a bit less money than Vancouver offered, as Lucic thought he would be playing with McDavid, racking up the points, and be having a legitimate chance to win. I mean, Lucic wasn't very intelligent in his decision making process, but that was probably what he was thinking of. I don't think he was thinking of the shiny new arena as being that important.
When Vancouver was winning, they were attracting decent talent. Now? It is over-paying for declining vets. If they turn it around, they will start attracting better players while at the same time not having to overpay.
Calgary's ability to attract FAs will largely be based on their on-ice performance this year, rather than their arena discussions (debacle), unless a FA feels that there is a strong chance this team will move. Given the market, I find it extremely unlikely, and I would bet on that if I was a FA.
If Arizona starts winning and becomes a stable franchise, I really believe they would be in the top 5 or 10 most preferred destinations in the NHL. Continue to lose, and continue to raise questions about your future existence, then yeah, then suddenly the 'arena' issue is much more important. I don't think that is the same case in Calgary. They COULD move, but given the market, it is unlikely.
