[Trade] DeBrincat (4 x $7.875mil AAV) to DET for Kubalik, Sebrango, cond 1st, 4th

[Mitch]

Originally Posted by mrdonkey

Does it need to be said why similar production from an older player at double the term and more money is bad value? Are you joking?

You'd have to legitimately believe he's a Selke calibre player throughout the twilight of his career, which he has only shown once flanked by two HoF players in their prime.

You can't even argue that it's "the Calgary tax" because this is Detroit we're talking about.

You are using point production to compare the value of a small one-dimensional winger to a two-way selke candidate center.

[Geeoff]

seems like a low return for Ottawa and a great contract for Detroit. Yzerplan back in business?

[Erick Estrada]

Pretty sobering return from a Flames fan point of view. You can understand why Conroy isn't pulling the trigger on any trades. Teams were getting much better returns at the trade deadline last season. It may be the route the Flames are forced to take.

[devo22]

heck of a deal or Detroit ... both in terms of what they had to give up and the contract they gave him. Never thought they'd get DeBrincat on a 4 year deal at this AAV, so hats off to Yzerman.

sucks for Ottawa, but it seemed like it was very much a "Detroit or bust" situation, so a bidding war never materialized and that's reflected in the return. They were also handcuffed because of the contract situation, so it was never a trade that they were going to win. But giving up two good picks for DeBrincat, only to settle for this return a year later ... yikes.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

seems like a low return for Ottawa and a great contract for Detroit. Yzerplan back in business?

According to some here, the Yzerman plan is taking home grown players and giving them long term contracts with no bridges (it’s not really what happened in TB but OK).

He seems to me to be doing what Treliving did - trying to accelerate through signings and trades. This team is better than they were but they certainly aren’t scary. Debrincat and Larkin have had good seasons, never quite PPG. But Copp and Compher are third liners on good teams. I guess he hopes Lucas takes a big step and Sprong wasn’t a flash in the pan in Seattle.

[Erick Estrada]

Taking Cossa over Wallstedt looks like a decision that may haunt the Wings as well.

[PeteMoss]

I think what else this is showing is Conroy should be patient with his trades. Everyone wants action now - but with so few teams having cap space you have such a limited pool of teams to trade with or you're forced to take on junk you don't want to make a trade.

Waiting until mid-season/trade deadline to make trades is probably going to end up being the smartest move if you want the best return.

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Taking Cossa over Wallstedt looks like a decision that may haunt the Wings as well.

Agreed.
Mason McDonald effect, an inflated WJHC showing sure helped.

[littlereddevil]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Easy to fleece the other GM when it's widely known that the player will only sign an extension with a small number of teams.
This is the disadvantage hitting canadian markets. These players are prepared to hit the market with preferred destinations in mind, that are generally known, so it's hard to extract great value.

It makes you wonder if Canadian GMs will start avoiding American-born players at all costs, whether via the draft, trades, or free agency.

Either way, the original intentions of the salary cap era being a way to level the playing field have clearly not panned out, as there are still more desirable markets that are driven by player perception (+/- their agents' opinions). The market is clearly tilted in favour of larger American markets.

I wonder who will be the next American player to leave a Canadian team for peanuts. Matthews?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by littlereddevil

It makes you wonder if Canadian GMs will start avoiding American-born players at all costs, whether via the draft, trades, or free agency.

Either way, the original intentions of the salary cap era being a way to level the playing field have clearly not panned out, as there are still more desirable markets that are driven by player perception (+/- their agents' opinions). The market is clearly tilted in favour of larger American markets.

I wonder who will be the next American player to leave a Canadian team for peanuts. Matthews?

The salary cap absolutely levelled the playing field. It’s been a huge success in that regard. It has kept teams like Calgary viable.

But you can’t regulate out player preference. That has been around forever and will continue to be around forever. It can also work in a Canadian team’s favour.

I think what we’re seeing mostly is that guys are speaking up ahead of time and saying they want to test UFA, which gives their team an opportunity to get something for them. Every year there are dozens of guys that hit UFA and choose not to sign with the team they were on.

[Sylvanfan]

What a terrible series of moves for Ottawa. Give up a lot to get a guy who plays 1 season for you, is your 4th highest scorer with a -31 on your non playoff team Than deal him a year later for a lot less. I have to do some research to see if Debrincant is a play driver or more of a higher end finisher. I don't think Larkin and Raymond are the same level of player Patrick Kane was or even what he had with him in Ottawa last year.

One day teams will learn that 25-27 year olds with 2 or less years left on their contract are not a great trade target they were in the pre lockout NHL unless you know you can extend them. 18 years...not enough time to figure this out apparently...

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Samonadreau

I keep hearing this, but ai also keeps hearing fans cmscream for patience. I think its Canadian owners and media that are not patient.

That is not really the point I was making. My point was that Canadian fans are SO invested that unless the team is perrenially contending, we will be screaming about everything they think is wrong, because we are all convinced we know how to win. Whether rebuilding, or pushing to keep the competitive window open, the volume of discontent from within Canadian fanbases can be deafening. And, you are right—the media escalates this anxiety. I think owners tend to exhibit impatience because they are scared to death of how fanbases will react based on how they do react. Don't like the direction of the team? Cancel your season tickets and stop going to games. This Sword of Damacles dangling over an owner's head is likely to push him into making poor decisions, and it's a no-win situation. Because you cannot please every fan, you cannot simply shut the noise from fans out, there are always going to be fans who are vocally, persistently dissatisfied. In Canafian markets—much more so than anywhere in the US—swaths of dissatisfied fans are much more unavoidable.

Sent from my SM-G986W using Tapatalk

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by littlereddevil

It makes you wonder if Canadian GMs will start avoiding American-born players at all costs, whether via the draft, trades, or free agency.

Either way, the original intentions of the salary cap era being a way to level the playing field have clearly not panned out, as there are still more desirable markets that are driven by player perception (+/- their agents' opinions). The market is clearly tilted in favour of larger American markets.

I wonder who will be the next American player to leave a Canadian team for peanuts. Matthews?

I completely disagree with the salary cap not leveling the playing field. Maybe you're too young to remember, but before the cap era, small market and Canadian teams (except for the Leafs) were basically a farm team to the big boys. You had the Rangers paying guys like Holik $10M a year, and they could just bury him in their line up if it didn't work out, and they'd move onto the next shiny UFA. It was terrible as a small market team fan.

You can't mandate where a player prefers to play, and that reality will never have a solution. The cap only helps to mitigate against it and put a limit to it.

[Jiggy]

Originally Posted by littlereddevil

It makes you wonder if Canadian GMs will start avoiding American-born players at all costs, whether via the draft, trades, or free agency.

Either way, the original intentions of the salary cap era being a way to level the playing field have clearly not panned out, as there are still more desirable markets that are driven by player perception (+/- their agents' opinions). The market is clearly tilted in favour of larger American markets.

I wonder who will be the next American player to leave a Canadian team for peanuts. Matthews?

I've talked to a few players I know who are currently playing in the NHL. All of them mentioned COVID is still fresh in the minds of the players. The bubble season was rough for a lot of the American guys being locked down and not having family with them. And while they couldn't really do much in Canada, their family and friends in the states were able to enjoy themselves much more. The players don't disagree with how COVID restrictions were managed in Canada, but they would rather be in their own country if it went down again. I think it might take 5 or more years of normal life again before most American born players want to sign long term in Canada.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

The salary cap absolutely levelled the playing field. It’s been a huge success in that regard. It has kept teams like Calgary viable.

But you can’t regulate out player preference. That has been around forever and will continue to be around forever. It can also work in a Canadian team’s favour.

I think what we’re seeing mostly is that guys are speaking up ahead of time and saying they want to test UFA, which gives their team an opportunity to get something for them. Every year there are dozens of guys that hit UFA and choose not to sign with the team they were on.

I'm actually seeing it a bit different now. Prior to the cap, Calgary at least could outspend to keep a player. Now, the same player can go anywhere they want and Calgary can't match the other factors. I do think the cap should have a tax allowance. Can't avoid the rest of the non-pecuniary issues though.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I'm actually seeing it a bit different now. Prior to the cap, Calgary at least could outspend to keep a player. Now, the same player can go anywhere they want and Calgary can't match the other factors. I do think the cap should have a tax allowance. Can't avoid the rest of the non-pecuniary issues though.

Who did the Flames ever keep by out spending all other teams in the league?

[Paulie Walnuts]

Johnny and Matthew are already Hall of Fame players? WTF

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Macho0978

Who did the Flames ever keep by out spending all other teams in the league?

Back in the 80s they used to pay very well, according to the players (salary info is hard to find but I recall some of those guys saying the Flames were among the tops in salaries). In the mid 90s they got cheap and lost players. (see Macinnis).

Kisio was a guy they threw money at in the early 90s.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

seems like a low return for Ottawa and a great contract for Detroit. Yzerplan back in business?

Not sure its a low return, its an okay return for a difficult situation.

Ottawa obviously did not have a lot of choices.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Back in the 80s they used to pay very well, according to the players (salary info is hard to find but I recall some of those guys saying the Flames were among the tops in salaries). In the mid 90s they got cheap and lost players. (see Macinnis).

Kisio was a guy they threw money at in the early 90s.

I'd frame it in a different way.

In the 80's the Flames were a have team in the economic climate of the NHL back then. Our pockets allowed us to build the top level teams we did and was an advantage over most of the NHL.

In the 90's when the economics of the game started changing, the Flames very much became a "have not" team (wasn't cheapness, the environment changed). With no salary Cap in place, there was slight risk of losing the team, and it's why we saw the even smaller market Canadian teams (Winnipeg and QC) move.

Thankfully the cap came in and was literally the savior for markets like the Flames. Both in viability and ability to have a shot at competing.

I think what we are seeing now, is over the past 20 years, more and more rights / control has been negotiated by the players, and to someone else point, macro factors (like tax rates) and player preference now mean so much more than they did in the first few seasons of the cap, because the players have more control to action them than they first did. So, what we have now, is SOOO much better than if there was no cap, but it is surfacing up "have" and "have not" scenarios again.

I'm not sure if it skews my view point, but being a Flames fan as a teen in the late 90's, when there was never a hope of competing, and always the looming risk of losing the team, maybe makes me complacent with being just happy we have a hope each year of potentially fielding a team that could do some damage and win if the stars align.