Seattle Expansion Draft Speculation

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by dammage79

On Tim and Friends yesterday they seem to think Tree is gonna stand pat and let this ride out. Yikes.

? That is fantastic news if correct.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

And if they let Gio go, they aren't making the playoffs.

They just missed the playoffs in the worst division in hockey with him. He's likely to be gradually worse than he was last season so IMO I'm not sure it matters much either way really. I'm sure Treliving would use the $6.75 million in free cap space to bring in talent that either helps replace Gio or fortifies the top 6 forward group. In fact I think they can be better providing they use that extra cap space wisely.

[stemit14]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

They did that with Stone but I don’t think the league was happy about that and also would Gio buy into that?

If the flames were to sign him to a deal that ensured he lost no money in from the buyout then I would think gio would be ok with it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Vinny01]

Before the start of the season it seemed so easy. I remember commenting in the Tanev signing thread the best thing that could happen is he plays well enough to be selected by Seattle. That obviously is a hater comment about a former Canuck who I didn’t value at all. Tanev blew me away this year and has earned his protection spot.

The way the season went however the decision remains an easy one. This is a group that took a step back and cannot justify spending assets to retain a 37 year old. If there is a futures based deal like the one in the blog posted where the Flames send a 2nd and good prospect to protect Gio I am not going to be happy. Why trade Bennett if those same assets are being used to protect Gio?

As ComixZone mentioned though I do not see how a win now team doesn’t want to keep their captain and top pairing Dman even if he is 38. The fact he is 21 games from 1000 and has been a career flame muddy the waters as well. He has a legacy in Calgary that I believe both Gio and the organization want to keep in tact. Gio also helps this team on the ice significantly.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

They just missed the playoffs in the worst division in hockey with him. He's likely to be gradually worse than he was last season so IMO I'm not sure it matters much either way really. I'm sure Treliving would use the $6.75 million in free cap space to bring in talent that either helps replace Gio or fortifies the top 6 forward group. In fact I think they can be better providing they use that extra cap space wisely.

Let’s dial back that worst division in hockey stuff. Clearly the West division with the California teams was the worst in hockey and it is not even close. 8 teams finished with worse records than the last place team in the North.

I agree with everything else you are saying.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

As I just posted, if out of the playoff picture, you trade him.

If in the playoff picture, well, regardless of what fans want, that is the goal of the team. And if they let Gio go, they aren't making the playoffs.

Agreed.

But that's likely what you're signing up for.

Shedding assets to keep Gio and then go down to the wire as a bubble team that may or may not squeak in, but likely won't win a round.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

They did that with Stone but I don’t think the league was happy about that and also would Gio buy into that?

I think they allowed Stone because he had no other offers, and there was no suggestion that's what the intention was. If the NHL did not allow it, Stone was basically retired.

Gio would have lots of offers.

[Robbob]

I agree they should stand pat. almost 7M in cap space is pretty decent silver lining. Maybe if he does go you look to replace with Martinez, Savard, Oleksiak (if he makes it) etc. Important to bring in a Dman that plays heavy.

[TheIronMaiden]

I think people are conflating exposing Gio with "giving him away". In this instance the Flames are going to lose assets no matter what. There is no silver lining, it is 100% losing a player for nothing. With that in mind, BT's job is damage control. How can we lose the least amount possible.

BT is in a position where despite losing a quality player, he can free up some cap space. This is as close to silver lining as we can get in this situation. This doesn't mean he wants it to happen, or is trying to make it happen. He is just weighing the total cost of the situation. For better or worse.

As a fan, I am gutted we might lose Gio, but a GM's job should never be emotional, and this unfortunately is the most pragmatic option, in a difficult circumstance.

[blender]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Generally, I would agree with the 'do nothing' stance.

But in the case of Giordano, I disagree. If the price (for the sake of argument) is Petterson and a 2nd, plus Kylington, that price can be more than recouped by trading Gio at the deadline - he is easily worth 2 2nds, maybe a 1st, depending on where the market is at.

So if you make the deal, you lose Kylington, Petterson and a 2nd, but then regain 2 2nds. Plus, you have Gio for 3/4s of the season.

If you do nothing, you lose Gio.

Option 1 is substantially better.

What's the point of spending to protect Gio if the plan is to trade him at the deadline?
You only spend to protect if you are planning on a playoff run.

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

I think they allowed Stone because he had no other offers, and there was no suggestion that's what the intention was. If the NHL did not allow it, Stone was basically retired.

Gio would have lots of offers.

Yes, so it won’t happen

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by Robbob

I agree they should stand pat. almost 7M in cap space is pretty decent silver lining. Maybe if he does go you look to replace with Martinez, Savard, Oleksiak (if he makes it) etc. Important to bring in a Dman that plays heavy.

Yes you can jump start the rebuild with the cap space

Also, keep Gio for the playoffs is lol

[getbak]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1415344452990906368

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Fiddled a bit with the protection list, but here is what I came up with on CapFriendly. Interesting how different these lists are. I think the takeaway for me is that you can take many different strategies (cheap contracts, spend liberally on higher priced talent) and still come within the cap. I tried to spend conservatively, take extra Dmen for trade purposes. Cap at $61M, but way more than 24 players. Because of so many bodies and potential other trades, I don't have it as a line 1-4 Forwards and Top 6 D.

Forwards:
Henrique -Ana
McCann - Pit
Pearson - Van (unlikely to be exposed as he was just signed, but available on the site)
Sissons - Nsh
Bjork - Buf
Watson - Ott
Archibald - Edm
Stenlund - Clb
Sprong - Wsh
Erne - Det
Barbashev-StL
Dickinson - Dal
Gauthier - NYR
Gambrell - SJ

Defense
Gio -Cgy
Chariot - Mtl
Maata - LAK
Graves - Col
Cernak - TBL
Hagg - Phi
Mayfield - NYI
Stillman - Chi
Siegenthaler - NJD
Clifton - Bos
Bean - Car
Stanley - Win

Goalies
Talbot - Min
Dreidger - Fla
Hill - Ari
Campbell - Tor

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by blender

What's the point of spending to protect Gio if the plan is to trade him at the deadline?
You only spend to protect if you are planning on a playoff run.

The rationale would be that if you think you can get a better return at the deadline than you are presently spending to keep him, it’s sound asset management. There are a couple big ifs though: it only makes sense if he doesn’t deteriorate more and doesn’t get injured, and if the market at the TDL is what you predict.

[DJones]

Not worth spending assets to protect Gio. You can replace his value with the cap savings.

He's still good, but you can replace him with the 6.75M

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

I think they allowed Stone because he had no other offers, and there was no suggestion that's what the intention was. If the NHL did not allow it, Stone was basically retired.

Gio would have lots of offers.

Again, there was nothing the league could do, because what the Flames did with signing Stone after his buyout did not violate any league rules. They were free to do it and did not have to get approval or an exemption from the NHL.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by stemit14

Is it possible to buy giordano out and just re-sign him after the expansion draft? Would the league allow that?

If so, the flames could buy him out and sign him to a 2 year deal. Protects him from expansion and the flames won’t have to give up any assets.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Huh, that's an interesting tactic that I haven't thought of. If Gio really wanted to stay in Calgary, can Tre not buy him out, and then re-sign him at whatever the difference in wages Gio's losing, to make him "whole"? That way, he's not exposed to Seattle, and he can sign back with the the Flames. Who knows, he might be able to squeeze a second year out of the Flames by signing for a discount.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by DJones

Not worth spending assets to protect Gio. You can replace his value with the cap savings.

He's still good, but you can replace him with the 6.75M

With who?

...A Giordano buyout and re-signing...I legit wonder if that would be okay? The Stone situation kind of spells out "Yes, it's totally fine". I believe there was some rules restricting such actions around the compliance buyouts...but on normal buy outs?

From CapFriendly:

For one season following a compliance buyout, players were not permitted to rejoin the team which performed the buyout (this restriction does not exist for normal buyouts).

Yeah, we should totally buyout Mark Girdano and then re-sign him. Like...duh. This is the path forward. Buy him out, and then re-sign him to a 1-3 year deal at a very reasonable cap hit. The buyout costs us 2.25M this season and next.

[tvp2003]

If we lose Gio, we give the "C" to Tkachuk and watch him take it to another level.

Boom, two problems solved.