[Signing] Flames sign Mangiapane (3 yrs, $5.8 mil AAV)

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Eh. By then he’ll be 30.

I don’t want to be paying non-franchise wingers into their 30s.

We get the best years of Mangiapane, and someone else overpays him for 6 or 7 years.

5 years would take him to 31. Mangiapane isn't going to fall into oblivion like some players may by that age. Players like him don't exactly grow on trees either - make no mistake, he should be viewed as a franchise player in terms of the heavy lifting he does.

Someone needs to drive play and contribute at both ends of the ice. If this team is not going to go into a rebuild mode again, why wouldn't you sign him for 4-5 seasons and ensure his best years are in a Flames jersey? Backlund's deal isn't exactly burning the Flames and he's of the same ilk where he can be a very good player for the team for a long time.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

His scoring really didn't translate to the playoffs though. He was nowhere near as bad as some of their other forwards but streaky scorers are hard to depend on.

His production is streaky, his play isn't

Mangiapane was the number one ranked forward in the playoffs for CF%, and 19th in xGF%. He was 17th in individual high danger chances.

Good things happen when he's on the ice. That didn't change or was streaky at all in the playoffs.

[Knut]

People get hung up on Goals and Assists. What Mangiapane does the best on the team is backside pressure. He causes a lot of turn overs at the blueline doing this. He also has a non-stop Motor and while sometimes he gets outmuscled he can recover quickly.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by jayswin

This contract is fine in terms of living up to it, won't find much argument there. It's that some wanted longer term, but it likely would have cost in the high 6's to 7's to get it done and then yeah, there is danger he won't live up to it over the years.

I'm happy with this for Mangianpane as we were paying him based on what is likely his best or close to best seasons. I wanted 3-5 years for Kylington as that's where I believe we stand to lose by going super short and walking him to UFA.

Kylington was someone that I would have loved at $3.5AAV on 4-5 years. I feel we'll be staring down a $6-$7+AAV contract PLUS the ability for him to walk and test free agency in two years. Not the end of the world, but if I was choosing, I would have gone Mangi short, Kylington long. Mangi would be hard pressed to beat what he's done significantly, Kylington I believe will beat what he's done significantly, so two years and a walk to UFA is an ugly pill to swallow from my projection of him.

Originally Posted by getbak

Huberdeau and Weegar are both signed for the upcoming season. Lucic and Monahan's contracts are both over after the upcoming season.

If Huberdeau and/or Weegar sign extensions, there will be no overlap with the current Lucic and Monahan contracts.

getback, I fully understand the contracts of the four players, maybe I was unclear in what I was suggesting there. It wasn't about fitting those players in together this season. What I was saying was this:

If Brad can't get deals done before the season then he will likely shift his strategy and acquire futures for Huberdeau and Weegar and then he will not be as worried about getting rid of Lucic or Monahan as we will not likley be a contending team.

If Brad can get extensions done then suddenly we are a contending team and therefore getting rid of Lucic and/or Monahan suddenly does become important to acquire another top six forward or other pieces to go for it this season.

Was not suggesting anything to do with clearing cap space for Huberdeau and Weegars final year of their current contract.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

5 years would take him to 31. Mangiapane isn't going to fall into oblivion like some players may by that age. Players like him don't exactly grow on trees either - make no mistake, he should be viewed as a franchise player in terms of the heavy lifting he does.

Someone needs to drive play and contribute at both ends of the ice. If this team is not going to go into a rebuild mode again, why wouldn't you sign him for 4-5 seasons and ensure his best years are in a Flames jersey?

Why do you phrase things as if the Flames never even though of the same notion? The agent wanted more money than they were willing to parcel out for that term, so they went shorter.

They likely had 2,3,4,5,6 and 7 year deals on the table being talked about back and forth.

I'd like 7 years at $4M please! May have been waiting a long time to get it though.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Why do you phrase things as if the Flames never even though of the same notion? The agent wanted more money than they were willing to parcel out for that term, so they went shorter.

They likely had 2,3,4,5,6 and 7 year deals on the table being talked about back and forth.

I'd like 7 years at $4M please! May have been waiting a long time to get it though.

Who said anything about 7 years and $4M AAV? You're spinning for reasons unexplained.

The GM has a tendency to sacrifice long term deals with RFA players for cap reasons and this is again (see Tkachuk) another player that should not have been put in that bin. There was also a clear indication that the player was very willing to go long term - no reason to fear monger as you are doing that this would have added millions to the AAV to add a 4th or 5th year.

Mangiapane is a player you go for term with at this point every day of the week.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

Who said anything about 7 years and $4M AAV? You're spinning for reasons unexplained.

The GM has a tendency to sacrifice long term deals with RFA players for cap reasons and this is again (see Tkachuk) another player that should not have been put in that bin. There was also a clear indication that the player was very willing to go long term - no reason to fear monger as you are doing that this would have added millions to the AAV to add a 4th year.

I'm not spinning anything.

I'm pointing out we don't have the information to assess a 3 year deal vs a 5 year deal or a 7 year deal.

To say you would have preferred a 5 year deal is pretty obvious if you could get it at the same cap hit. They couldn't. So they went with three.

What GM doesn't do the same thing? Every team in the league is trying to fit players in with combinations of term and dollars.

Where is their fear mongering in that? It's basis common sense.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

Who said anything about 7 years and $4M AAV? You're spinning for reasons unexplained.

The GM has a tendency to sacrifice long term deals with RFA players for cap reasons and this is again (see Tkachuk) another player that should not have been put in that bin. There was also a clear indication that the player was very willing to go long term - no reason to fear monger as you are doing that this would have added millions to the AAV to add a 4th or 5th year.

Mangiapane is a player you go for term with at this point every day of the week.

Sure but it would have been a much larger cap hit the more years they signed him for. They were not getting him at $5.8 for anything over 3 years.

[FlamesAddiction]

Mangiapane's two-way game really improved as the season went on. He became a much more complete player and I am not worried at all about the AAV for this contract. It would have been nice to be a year or 2 longer actually.

I do think that he had a lot of luck early in the season and his 35 goal total was inflated, but with more ice-time and PP time next season, I wouldn't be shocked to see him get that again.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

Who said anything about 7 years and $4M AAV? You're spinning for reasons unexplained.

The GM has a tendency to sacrifice long term deals with RFA players for cap reasons and this is again (see Tkachuk) another player that should not have been put in that bin. There was also a clear indication that the player was very willing to go long term - no reason to fear monger as you are doing that this would have added millions to the AAV to add a 4th or 5th year.

Mangiapane is a player you go for term with at this point every day of the week.

Wait, you think adding more years to this contract wouldn't add millions to the AAV?

Of course it would, that's how these contracts work, or else you'd just sign him to 4-6 years instead. This was very obviously done at three years because that's the AAV Brad was comfortable with.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I'm not spinning anything.

I'm pointing out we don't have the information to assess a 3 year deal vs a 5 year deal or a 7 year deal.

To say you would have preferred a 5 year deal is pretty obvious if you could get it at the same cap hit. They couldn't. So they went with three.

What GM doesn't do the same thing? Every team in the league is trying to fit players in with combinations of term and dollars.

Where is their fear mongering in that? It's basis common sense.

No, it's called expressing my opinion that I would have preferred a long term deal. Chill out man.

It's bizarre that you always have to spin that the team's hands were tied or that we can't talk about something because we don't know for sure.

If the team wanted to push for a long term deal they could have and it certainly wouldn't have priced the player out given the cap hit they landed on for this deal.

[iggyloob12]

Originally Posted by Knut

People get hung up on Goals and Assists. What Mangiapane does the best on the team is backside pressure. He causes a lot of turn overs at the blueline doing this. He also has a non-stop Motor and while sometimes he gets outmuscled he can recover quickly.

Teams pay for goals and assists—and pay top dollar to those who can deliver at key times.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

Sure but it would have been a much larger cap hit the more years they signed him for. They were not getting him at $5.8 for anything over 3 years.

Modest increase, sure and if that's the case, why not add a little to the AAV? You're not going to regret it when you have a player like this on the books for 2 more years.

I highly doubt the Flames were looking at a 6.8M cap hit on a 4 or 5 year deal for the player.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

No, it's called expressing my opinion that I would have preferred a long term deal. Chill out man.

It's bizarre that you always have to spin that the team's hands were tied or that we can't talk about something because we don't know for sure.

If the team wanted to push for a long term deal they could have and it certainly wouldn't have priced the player out given the cap hit they landed on for this deal.

But adding years to contacts like the Mangiapane one does add millions to the AAV, you seem to think it doesn't. That's why lots of teams opt for shorter deals if they're trying to put a contender together.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

I think Anaheim might want Lucic.

Zegras had some teams take some runs at him late in the year last season and I think they could think having Lucic in the lineup might deter some of that.

22 players signed, no remaining RFAs they have to sign. And $18M in cap room.

So for them the $5.25M cap hit doesn't mean a whole lot. They can probably send over a 6th round pick to get Lucic on what is really a 1 year - $1 Million dollar deal for them, and then if they need they can probably move him at the deadline with 50% retained (which is nothing in real money) and get a better pick back.

I do wonder if the appeal of trading Lucic decreased when Gudbranson left. Zadarov is big but not the greatest fighter, outside of him you don't have much toughness left. Rooney and Coleman will fight but they aren't going to deter anything.

[Burning Beard]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

Modest increase, sure and if that's the case, why not add a little to the AAV? You're not going to regret it when you have a player like this on the books for 2 more years.

I highly doubt the Flames were looking at a 6.8M cap hit on a 4 or 5 year deal for the player.

Dude even his agent said they were looking in the 7s or 8s on a longer term.

[Knut]

Originally Posted by iggyloob12

Teams pay for goals and assists—and pay top dollar to those who can deliver at key times.

Sure.. Like when he scored the Big top shelf goal in the Dallas series to make it 2-1 in Game 5.

This is a good contract and it doesnt tie them to the player at the start of a potential decline.

[Atodaso]

Originally Posted by Macman

Looks like someone misspelled Brett’s name and didn’t even recognize him.



I saw him at the gym once, he said hi to me and I wasn’t even being a fanboy.



But Brett’ s a legend.

That's exactly what happened. But going forward this shall be used when Mangiapane excellently executes a big goal.

*Bret

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Burning Beard

Dude even his agent said they were looking in the 7s or 8s on a longer term.

I think what his agent said is being a little misinterpreted. He said that if Mangiapane were to only take a 1 year deal and repeated or improved on his 35 goal season, past precedence would give him a market value or $7-8 million. He also said right after, that the market can be unpredictable because of the cap and that there was no guarantee that a team would offer that, but it was a possibility.

He was trying to make a case for why the Flames should hedge their bets and consider locking him in longer than 1 year, but he wasn't really saying they expected that number to be in the $7-8 million.

[iggyloob12]

Originally Posted by Knut

Sure.. Like when he scored the Big top shelf goal in the Dallas series to make it 2-1 in Game 5.

This is a good contract and it doesnt tie them to the player at the start of a potential decline.

Yes, it's a solid contract for a solid second-line player. I'm glad they got it below $6M because his streaky nature makes him a secondary piece, not a first liner.