[Rumour] Free agent courting period news and rumors

[MikeMc]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Pathetic post right down to the Pixel 2 tapatalk crap.

Judgy mcjudgington over here with the combo Pixel and tapatalk diss. Burn.

Anyways.

I'll miss Hath a bit but agree he's going to get paid and we can't play that game. I do wonder who we add to crash and be a bit of a prick (especially in light of our lack of playoff toughness and compete).



Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

It seems the talks got pretty specific so I don’t know about “it was never going to happen”.

It’s not of interest to imagine what the team would look like if Treliving had pulled the trigger?

Lol, Ottawa "we want Andersson and Valimaki".
Tree- "click"

That was pretty specific and deep negotiations. Wouldnt you say?

Come back to reality kids. Stone was never going to happen, it didnt happen, move on.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I think this is myth making. Face saving from the flames after walking away from the deadline with only fantenberg.

Couldn't trade for stone because couldn't re-sign him due to tagging room restrictions.

Cost to acquire included taking back neal which is why Tre said a couple of times that the sens were after multiple 1sts, valimaki And Andersson, but settled for brannstrom and a 2nd from Vegas.

If it was only valimaki, the flames would've pulled the trigger.

What complicated things was Calgary HAD to send back salary and Vegas didn't. As we are all seeing right now, cap space has value.

Calgary could have added Stone without having to move a lot of money at the deadline. IIRC they could have added a 6.5 M player and Stone was making 7.5...so even just sending down one of the waiver exempt guys would have covered last years issue.

That thing fell apart when it was clear that no deal was happening unless Valimaki was part of the package, and that it would take well over 10 million to get Stone to sign.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Calgary could have added Stone without having to move a lot of money at the deadline. IIRC they could have added a 6.5 M player and Stone was making 7.5...so even just sending down one of the waiver exempt guys would have covered last years issue.

That thing fell apart when it was clear that no deal was happening unless Valimaki was part of the package, and that it would take well over 10 million to get Stone to sign.

I believe tagging room restrictions prevented them from signing stone to an extension right away (he signed within hours if being traded to Vegas).

I think when Tre mentions they didn't want to do a deal for a rental, that is what he is referring to. Stone would've been a rental acquisition because the flames couldn't sign him to an extension without subtracting Neal's contract, and treliving wasn't prepared to move valimaki for a rental.

To fix the cap situation the flames needed to send back Mike stone or Neal and Ottawa charged a premium for capspace.

Vegas sent $0.00 and got the player.

Tre said Ottawas ask was valimaki, Andersson, 1st for stone.

That is more than twice as valuable as the Vegas package.

It just doesn't pass a basic smell test that that was the ask unless there was another, MAJOR component to the transaction; like taking on 19 million in salary liability.

How does brannstrom and a 2nd get it done where Andersson and a 1st doesn't? Doesn't make any sense.

[sureLoss]

Andy Strickland @andystrickland
Former #stlblues 1st rounder Patrik Berglund exploring a return to the #NHL. Generating some interest.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I believe tagging room restrictions prevented them from signing stone to an extension right away (he signed within hours if being traded to Vegas).

I think when Tre mentions they didn't want to do a deal for a rental, that is what he is referring to. Stone would've been a rental acquisition because the flames couldn't sign him to an extension without subtracting Neal's contract, and treliving wasn't prepared to move valimaki for a rental.

To fix the cap situation the flames needed to send back Mike stone or Neal and Ottawa charged a premium for capspace.

Vegas sent $0.00 and got the player.

Tre said Ottawas ask was valimaki, Andersson, 1st for stone.

That is more than twice as valuable as the Vegas package.

It just doesn't pass a basic smell test that that was the ask unless there was another, MAJOR component to the transaction; like taking on 19 million in salary liability.

How does brannstrom and a 2nd get it done where Andersson and a 1st doesn't? Doesn't make any sense.

Tagging restrictions from last year prevented a deal being signed for this year?

Im not sure I understand...or really have no idea what tagging does. The Flames could have Stone on their cap starting July 1 at 11M and not be over the upper limit...nevermind the 10% float they would be allowed. Maybe I completely misunderstand how that works but I dont see how an extension that wouldnt kick in until Monday has anything to do with last years cap compliance.

At any rate, I think it came down to not willing to trade Valimaki AND having to sign Stone to 10 or 11 million over 8 years.

Im really happy BT said no to that, regardless of how good one thinks stone is.

[CanadaMatt]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I think when Tre mentions they didn't want to do a deal for a rental, that is what he is referring to. Stone would've been a rental acquisition because the flames couldn't sign him to an extension without subtracting Neal's contract, and treliving wasn't prepared to move valimaki for a rental.

This.

Do you remember the movie City Slickers? There’s a scene where the three friends are riding with the herd and one friend is trying to explain to another friend how you can record a show on a VCR without having the tv tuned to that station...

...well that’s how it felt last night trying to explain this to folks

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by CanadaMatt

This.

Do you remember the movie City Slickers? There’s a scene where the three friends are riding with the herd and one friend is trying to explain to another friend how you can record a show on a VCR without having the tv tuned to that station...

...well that’s how it felt last night trying to explain this to folks

There's a lot to be said for understanding how to make points without talking down to others. A lot of the reason why you get flak on this site is not what you have to say but how you say it.

I take BT at his word. I think they didn't want to pay the acquisition price.
You are welcome to disagree.
We should be able to do that without you basically calling those that disagree with you idiots.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by CanadaMatt

This.



Do you remember the movie City Slickers? There’s a scene where the three friends are riding with the herd and one friend is trying to explain to another friend how you can record a show on a VCR without having the tv tuned to that station...



...well that’s how it felt last night trying to explain this to folks

If you are feeling misunderstood it is probably because you need to communicate better. It would also help you tremendously to abandon the condescension. In any event, this is how I understood your point, but I—along with numerous other posters, it would seem—simply disagreed with what you were trying to argue


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rando]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I believe tagging room restrictions prevented them from signing stone to an extension right away (he signed within hours if being traded to Vegas).

Traded Feb 25th, signed new deal March 8th. Vegas faced the same tagging issue the Flames would have.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by transplant99

... think it came down to not willing to trade Valimaki AND having to sign Stone to 10 or 11 million over 8 years.

Im really happy BT said no to that, regardless of how good one thinks stone is.

This is essentially my read on things. I think Treliving in the first place found the cost unpalatable, and then was not ready to make the same commitment to an extension for the player. Hence, if the Flames decided they would not extend Stone the framework for the deal became a playoff rental and at that point collapsed entirely.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Tagging restrictions from last year prevented a deal being signed for this year?

Im not sure I understand...or really have no idea what tagging does. The Flames could have Stone on their cap starting July 1 at 11M and not be over the upper limit...nevermind the 10% float they would be allowed. Maybe I completely misunderstand how that works but I dont see how an extension that wouldnt kick in until Monday has anything to do with last years cap compliance.

At any rate, I think it came down to not willing to trade Valimaki AND having to sign Stone to 10 or 11 million over 8 years.

Im really happy BT said no to that, regardless of how good one thinks stone is.

Tagging room:

Under Article 50.5 of the 2013 NHL Collective Bargaining Agreement, any team that is trying to re-sign a player to a multi-year contract after December 1 needs to have “Payroll Room.” Basically, Payroll Room is the difference between the cap ceiling and the total amount of all Average Annual Values (“AAV”) and bonuses for the team’s one-way contract players, any deferred bonuses applicable during the current season, any buyout amounts, any outstanding offer sheets, any qualifying offers, or any money earned from two-way players while those players are playing in the NHL.[1]

So, if a team wants to re-sign a player, the difference between the team’s Payroll Room and the cap ceiling must exceed the amount of the AAV of the player’s contract. For those who keep up with NHL Free Agency, this isn’t a hard concept: you have to have cap space for the player to acquire him.

But in the world of extensions, it gets a bit trickier. In order to sign a player to an extension, the team needs enough of that difference to be able to afford his AAV this season. However, if the team does not have enough cap space from this difference, then the team may pull from any available cap space received from the expiration of the AAVs of its other players’ contracts at the end of the season so long as the cap space received would accommodate the player’s AAV after re-signing after the space is added to the existing difference in cap space.

For example:

If a team has $2 million in current cap space after Payroll Room is calculated, and that team wants to re-sign a player to a 3-year extension worth $3 million AAV, then it can do so if the team has at least one other player whose contract is worth at least $1 million, and that player’s contract expires at the end of the season. Thus, $2 million in current space + $1 million in expiring space = enough for the new $3 million AAV of the player. This $3 million would then be “tagged.”[2]

If Mike stone, Brodie or Frolik had contracts that expired this July 1, I believe the flames would've had enough tagging room to sign Stone to his extension. Having said that, they still wouldn't have been able to pay him without moving out Neal's deal. Imagine this week in terms of offersheets if the flames had 3 million in cap space for next season instead of 13.

Vegas reportedly had to wait until the March 1 tagging room as well, but knew they could get under the cap in the off-season (like they just did) before the Karlsson extension came into effect. Because Neal's term was already looking to be immoveable, Calgary did not have nearly the confidence they'd be able to move the cap pieces necessary to keep stone, tkachuk and sign competent goaltending.

I know it's been beaten to death and the severity of it is seriously depressing to consider going forward, but Neal's contract is absolutely crippling for Calgary.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Rando

Traded Feb 25th, signed new deal March 8th. Vegas faced the same tagging issue the Flames would have.

Yeah, the terms of the deal were known right away, but the deal wasn't actually signed for over a week.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Tagging room:



If Mike stone, Brodie or Frolik had contracts that expired this July 1, I believe the flames would've had enough tagging room to sign Stone to his extension. Having said that, they still wouldn't have been able to pay him without moving out Neal's deal. Imagine this week in terms of offersheets if the flames had 3 million in cap space for next season instead of 13.

Vegas reportedly had to wait until the March 1 tagging room as well, but knew they could get under the cap in the off-season (like they just did) before the Karlsson extension came into effect. Because Neal's term was already looking to be immoveable, Calgary did not have nearly the confidence they'd be able to move the cap pieces necessary to keep stone, tkachuk and sign competent goaltending.

I know it's been beaten to death and the severity of it is seriously depressing to consider going forward, but Neal's contract is absolutely crippling for Calgary.

I so suck at understanding stuff written like this but if i am reading it correctly, they needed whatever cap room they had at the deadline + whatever expiring contracts they had coming up on Monday to total whatever it was that Stone was making last year? (7.5 IIRC)

Did they not have that AND way more since they are sitting at 13 million in space as of today?

Not trying to beat a dead horse here, but this is the kind of minutiae I really dont pay a ton of attention to as i find it mind numbing, but something that obviously can affect things as well.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Lol, Ottawa "we want Andersson and Valimaki".
Tree- "click"

That was pretty specific and deep negotiations. Wouldnt you say?

Come back to reality kids. Stone was never going to happen, it didnt happen, move on.

Wow you must be pretty well connected. Thanked by a mod so I guess you are in the know so congrats.

What was the total package being considered and was it really just one 2 second conversation?

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Wow you must be pretty well connected. Thanked by a mod so I guess you are in the know so congrats.

What was the total package being considered and was it really just one 2 second conversation?

Jesus, really?

Here https://calgarysun.com/sports/hockey...quiet-deadline

It just wasn't going to happen. As per Brad " The real GM of the Calgary Flames" Treliving. Anyone have any facts about anything else regarding the stone trade?

Straight from the horses mouth, we weren't trading our young d men for a rental.

Edit: too much from me.

This whole exercise about the Stone thing is lame.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by transplant99

I so suck at understanding stuff written like this but if i am reading it correctly, they needed whatever cap room they had at the deadline + whatever expiring contracts they had coming up on Monday to total whatever it was that Stone was making last year? (7.5 IIRC)

Did they not have that AND way more since they are sitting at 13 million in space as of today?

Not trying to beat a dead horse here, but this is the kind of minutiae I really dont pay a ton of attention to as i find it mind numbing, but something that obviously can affect things as well.

So it's a two pronged complication.

As I understand it, they would not have had the tagging room because of the pending bonuses potentially owed. I believe bonuses count until such a point as they are no longer achievable but getbak will probably correct me here.

The other part here is risk: if you have to move Neal and Mike stone to afford to re-sign Mark Stone, you're taking on SUBSTANTIAL risk that you will be able to move those contracts prior to July 1st when tkachuk can be offersheeted.

Neal's contract removed any flexibility the flames had. Trading for stone without subtracting Neal would've been a disaster, which is why Neal to Ottawa was a major component of the deal. Even now, Neal's contract is a huge problem for the flames to navigate around. They would be able to keep Frolik AND Brodie if Neal wasn't on the roster.

A big reason those contributing valuable roster players have to move is because of a non contributing no value (non)roster player.

If you trade for stone without subtracting Neal you can't sign him to an extension right away which increases the risk he reaches this courting period without a deal which basically guarantees he's a goner.

That was the 'not moving valimaki for a rental' argument. The price for making stone not a rental was 2x1sts, valimaki and Andersson to absorb Neal.

Based on what the leafs paid to drop a single year of Marleau, 2x1sts + Andersson may have been a relatively cheap price for Neal.

[Vinny01]

I think the main reason the Flames did not trade for Stone was due to their cap situation and the fact it would have been impossible to keep him and the rest of the team intact. The thought of losing Valimaki for a player that likely would have walked this summer is just too risky. Had they kept Stone they would have $4M in cap space and could easily lose Tkachuk, Bennett or Rittich to an offer sheet. Moving out Valimaki would also make trading Brodie more difficult.


My thoughts personally if the Flames had a better cap situation and did not have the Neal, Frolik, and Stone contracts on the books they would have moved Valimaki+1st+(whatever needed to top Vegas offer) for a signed Stone.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Wow you must be pretty well connected. Thanked by a mod so I guess you are in the know so congrats.

What was the total package being considered and was it really just one 2 second conversation?

Why does it matter what I thank? Jeepers

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Why does it matter what I thank? Jeepers

I guess I find it odd when a mod thanks a post that is dismissive and condescending but maybe I misread it.