Can’t they just keep Vanacek? Amos can be sent down without waivers so no need for the flames to take another goalie back especially one that has a decent sized NHL contract.
To me, it would make more sense to move Vanecek who makes 3.4m next season (he's not an expiring contract), and Schmid is a better goaltender than Vancek long term. Sign him to a bridge deal for 2 years to align with Markstrom's last 2 years expiring at the same time. That to me makes more sense and also giving LA a goalie option at least for another season at a cheap rate since they're already up on the cap.
Just trying to put myself in the shoes of the other GMs. For Calgary, I like the futures coming back and Palat, the the better player than Mangiapane, to make Mangiapane expendable too. I bet a Palat - Backlund - Coleman line would be a two-way shutdown line while the youngsters play with Huberdeau and Kadri.
What the longest deal an NHL team has actually retained on? It simply isn't happening with Kadri or Huberdeau. That's just silly.
It's far to valuable to have those retention spots available each year in a cap world for a rebuilding team. Being able to retain money is almost a necessity at this point in order to facilitate trades. That flexibility is crucial and far more valuable than any retention would offer on a long term boat anchor.
I'm sure there's a longer one out there, but Toronto retained like 12% of Kessel's cap for Pittsburgh, and they had him on the books for a very long time. By the time they were contending they were still having to pay money on Kessel's contract, who by then had been on 3 teams since that contract was signed (TOR/PIT/AZ).
I don't want Calgary trading Kadri or Huberdeau if it means we have to retain a double digit number on a number of years. Would rather take on contracts that are bad and expiring a lot sooner. If Colorado truly wants Kadri back in the fold, which I think would be a great idea for them considering Compher has left and Colton/Johansen have been pretty subpar as of late, then we take on either one of those guys and added cap on both sides to swap similar cap back to one another.
Retention should really only be used on the guys that are expiring this season.
To me, it would make more sense to move Vanecek who makes 3.4m next season (he's not an expiring contract), and Schmid is a better goaltender than Vancek long term. Sign him to a bridge deal for 2 years to align with Markstrom's last 2 years expiring at the same time. That to me makes more sense and also giving LA a goalie option at least for another season at a cheap rate since they're already up on the cap.
Just trying to put myself in the shoes of the other GMs. For Calgary, I like the futures coming back and Palat, the the better player than Mangiapane, to make Mangiapane expendable too. I bet a Palat - Backlund - Coleman line would be a two-way shutdown line while the youngsters play with Huberdeau and Kadri.
I think the deal in general is quite bad for the Flames. Taking a goalie they don’t want and a guy who is turning 33 this year with 3 more years at $6M per only to get a 1st and 2nd for Zadorov and Markstrom? I think it is really bad value overall. Palat has a NMC so he blocks the trade anyway but the last thing the Flames need is a 33 year old to be their third highest paid forward.
Let the Devils buyout the last year of Vanacek’s deal and allow the Flames to run their 2 goalies instead of replacing a goalie for another. If Markstrom keeps up this level of play he will continue to gain value and I think many teams will be interested this season or next summer.
What the longest deal an NHL team has actually retained on? It simply isn't happening with Kadri or Huberdeau. That's just silly.
It's far to valuable to have those retention spots available each year in a cap world for a rebuilding team. Being able to retain money is almost a necessity at this point in order to facilitate trades. That flexibility is crucial and far more valuable than any retention would offer on a long term boat anchor.
Longest that I could find is 4 years. Currently the Karlsson is the longest active retention. Lucic prior was also a 4 year.
I'm sure there's a longer one out there, but Toronto retained like 12% of Kessel's cap for Pittsburgh, and they had him on the books for a very long time. By the time they were contending they were still having to pay money on Kessel's contract, who by then had been on 3 teams since that contract was signed (TOR/PIT/AZ).
I don't want Calgary trading Kadri or Huberdeau if it means we have to retain a double digit number on a number of years. Would rather take on contracts that are bad and expiring a lot sooner. If Colorado truly wants Kadri back in the fold, which I think would be a great idea for them considering Compher has left and Colton/Johansen have been pretty subpar as of late, then we take on either one of those guys and added cap on both sides to swap similar cap back to one another.
Retention should really only be used on the guys that are expiring this season.
You are right. They retained 15% (1.2M) for 7 years. He was traded July 2015, just entering his second season into his 8 year contract.
The Following User Says Thank You to Robbob For This Useful Post:
A couple of things regarding the odds. So in order to get those 40% odds you still need to win the lottery. That's about 1/4 at best, so the absolute best case scenario of finishing last gives you a ~10% chance to win a cup.
Another thing you don't account for is when said player wins the cup. Most of them win it much later in their career, after the first 7 years of team control.
Here's a list of first overall picks drafted after 2008 with a cup: MacKinnon! That's it.
A deeper dive:
- Eichel drafted(2nd) in 2015, traded, first cup in 2023
- MacKinnon drafted in 2013, first cup in 2022
- Stamkos drafted in 2008, first cup in 2020
- Hedman (2nd) drafted in 2009 first cup in 2020
- I can't remember who was the top draft pick in STL
- Ovechkin drafted in 2004 first cup in 2018
- Backstrom(4th) drafted in 2006 first cup in 2018
Sid is the exception not the rule. My point is that even if you get a top player like Tkachuk or McDavid, that player will have the option to leave before a team has had enough cracks at a cup.
Look at how their respective teams performed in the standings/playoffs year over year also. These players listed were all on perennial playoff teams and often fighting for division spots.
If drafting top 1/2 gives the Flames a shot at being a perennial playoff team with a few conference finals appearances / stanley cup finals appearances, why wouldn't we try that? Doing what the Flames have been doing has obviously not worked.
You are right. They retained 15% (1.2M) for 7 years. He was traded July 2015, just entering his second season into his 8 year contract.
And I think we can all agree that 1.2m would have been nice for the Leafs when their bottom 6 was not very good for some of those last few seasons of Kessel's deal when they finally became a contending team.
And I think we can all agree that 1.2m would have been nice for the Leafs when their bottom 6 was not very good for some of those last few seasons of Kessel's deal when they finally became a contending team.
They wouldn't have Auston Matthews if they didn't make that trade.
The goal has to be to acquire our elite #1 defenceman and our elite #1 centre. Budget concerns down the road don't matter until you have that defender and that centre.
That Colton+Girard for Kadri+Vladar trade that somebody proposed makes a lot of sense IMO.
Colorado sheds Girard's deal and Colton's deal.
4 more years on each (8 combined years) at $9M total.
Kadri and Vladar are about $9M combined for 8 years combined (6 for Kadri, 2 for Vladar). So total $$$ traded is quite similar.
Kadri has 2 years more than Girard and Colton. But helps Colorado more in their immediate winning window.
Flames get younger with Girard (25) and Colton (27) and I think both guys actually have potentially better longer term roles here. Flames could use an offensive, puck mover than can QB and Girard can do that (He's been passed by Makar, Byram, Toews in Colorado). Colton is a guy that I think could be a 3rd line center on the team through a rebuild, some pump and dump potential if he gets more minutes and PP time to inflate his counting stats.
Last edited by SuperMatt18; 11-16-2023 at 11:39 AM.
The Following User Says Thank You to SuperMatt18 For This Useful Post:
(The Atlanta Flames picked 2nd overall in 1972 and 1973, taking Jacques Richard and Tom Lysiak, respectively. For reasons we know too well, it didn't do them much good.)
I took the time just now to whomp up a spreadsheet of teams that have drafted top-3 since the Entry Draft was established in 1979 (and in the Amateur Draft before that). Here, for each year's Stanley Cup winner in the cap era, is a list of the times they picked top 3 in the preceding 15 seasons:
That's 40 top-3 picks by the last 18 Stanley Cup champions, or 2.22 per team. In the league as a whole, in any given year, there are 45 players who have been drafted with a top-3 pick in the last 15 years, or (at the moment) 1.41 per team.
If you eliminate duplicates (multiple Cup winners), only 22 players remain on the list, divided among 12 franchises – 1.78 per team. It's a difference, but not a huge one, and the range goes from zero to four.
One thing that leaps to the eye is that all the teams to win multiple championships in this span have had at least three top-3 picks in the preceding 15 years, except Los Angeles. It would appear that you can get yourself a dynasty by sucking hard enough for long enough. But we need to be careful here.
At this moment, here is the number of times each team in the NHL has drafted top-3 in the 15 drafts from 2008 to 2022. (I leave off 2023 because nobody from that draft was in the league last time the Stanley Cup was awarded.) The last 5 Cup winners are marked with asterisks.
If sucking hard and drafting top-3 were the way to win championships, Edmonton and Buffalo would be the class of the league right now. Florida would have squashed Vegas like a bug in last year's finals, and presumably their highest scorer would not have been a 6th-overall pick acquired in a trade. As it is, there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of correlation. The last few champions either sucked a bit more than average during their latest rebuilds, or else never sucked at all and built their teams a different way. And the majority of the teams near the top of the list haven't won a thing.
Your list of previous Cup winners not drafting 3rd overall in the previous 15 years got me interested. Well, mostly Detroit. I looked at their roster and the highest pick they had was a 3rd overall, Brad Stuart whom they acquired at the trade deadline from LA. Detroit was Stuart's 5th team at that point. Stuart was drafted 3rd overall by San Jose in 1998.
Next highest drafted player was Daniel Cleary. 13th overall pick by Chicago in 1997. Detroit was his 4th team. Its safe to say that Cleary didn't live up to his billing but did well.
The highest drafted player by Detroit on that Cup winning team was Niklas Kronwall. He was drafted 29th overall by Detroit in 2000.
Looking at the rest of the roster you may say. Wait. They had Datsyuk, Zetterberg and Lidstrom... when the heck were those players drafted? Round 6 in 98, round 7 in 99 and round 3 in 89. They knew how to find some gems. That was very much an anomoly of a team when it comes to where their players were drafted. These three players were their best players on that team that year and they were all drafted by Detroit and remained in Detroit for their entire lenghty careers.
Drafting top 3 is key but so is devloping and retaining your picks whether they are top 3 in the draft or bottom 3 rounds.
The Following User Says Thank You to Buff For This Useful Post:
That Colton+Girard for Kadri+Vladar trade that somebody proposed makes a lot of sense IMO.
Colorado sheds Girard's deal and Colton's deal.
4 more years on each (8 combined years) at $9M total.
Kadri and Vladar are about $9M combined for 8 years combined (6 for Kadri, 2 for Vladar). So total $$$ traded is quite similar.
Kadri has 2 years more than Girard and Colton. But helps Colorado more in their immediate winning window.
Flames get younger with Girard (25) and Colton (27) and I think both guys actually have potentially better longer term roles here. Flames could use an offensive, puck mover than can QB and Girard can do that (He's been passed by Makar, Byram, Toews in Colorado). Colton is a guy that I think could be a 3rd line center on the team through a rebuild, some pump and dump potential if he gets more minutes and PP time to inflate his counting stats.
Not going young enough IMO.
Should be aiming for that 18-25 range. Those guys are what they are pretty much.
Should be aiming for that 18-25 range. Those guys are what they are pretty much.
I'd agree on the Lindholm, Hanifin, Tanev, Zadorov trades...or if they do look at moving an Andersson or Weegar.
But for Kadri I think you take what you can get because it's going to be tough to move that contract, especially with his trade protection.
I also think it's potentially easier to move Girard and Colton for younger pieces with 3 years left on their contracts after this season, than it would be with Kadri with 5.
Last edited by SuperMatt18; 11-16-2023 at 12:01 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to SuperMatt18 For This Useful Post:
I'd agree on the Lindholm, Hanifin, Tanev, Zadorov trades...or if they do look at moving an Andersson or Weegar.
But for Kadri I think you take what you can get because it's going to be tough to move that contract, especially with his trade protection.
I also think it's potentially easier to move Girard and Colton for younger pieces with 3 years left on their contracts after this season, than it would be with Kadri with 5.
I agree with this. If you are going full rebuild and you can move Kadri for that package you do it. It frees up cap space right around the time you hopefully have some longterm deals to sign with studs you draft in this draft and the next draft. The more space you have the easier it is to try to get those guys on a 8 year term or a longer term deal.
Everyone else that they trade they should be trying to get draft picks or prospects that are 23 or younger ideally in my mind. Hopefully develop a solid group of players that are in their 20’s and signed longterm to grow and develop together.
I think it more likely to use the three slots for expiring contracts and look at Markstrom in the off season.
If there is legit interest in Markstrom I think you have to consider trading him while the iron is hot as he's been so inconsistent with the Flames that to me he's the very definition of a sell high player.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Erick Estrada For This Useful Post:
Should be aiming for that 18-25 range. Those guys are what they are pretty much.
When it comes to dumping Kadri’s contract I don’t think the flames can be that picky. It fills positions of need with a top 4 D and middle 6 C. I think that would be a decent deal for both sides
The Following User Says Thank You to Vinny01 For This Useful Post:
If the Flames are going to be a bad team for a couple of seasons, why would you want Wolf to experience that, and possibly disrupt his development. Wouldn't you want Markstrom there to take that pressure off of him? If Vladar is here instead, Wolf is going to get the bulk of starts. So, Vladar should go.
Kadri has been living up to his contract this year. As the cap goes up, his percentage of hit against the cap will be pretty reasonable. Also, if the Flames want to turnaround faster than four years, you actually need some 30+ players who can carry the teams tough assignments. So, Lindholm should go.
__________________
"By Grabthar's hammer ... what a savings."
For Colorado, Tampa, Washington, etc it was generally about 12-14 years after their first top 3 pick that they won the cup. Hawks and Kings won close to their top pick, but had been bad for years before making those picks.
Pittsburgh is the exception (they also won the Crosby lottery) but for the most part but generally the teams are really bad for a while first.
IMO the key is still less about drafting top 3, and more about just drafting well overall. The key for all these teams was strong depth to go along with the star players due to strong overall drafting and player development.
IMO the key is drafting top 3 and hopefully getting lucky and getting 1st (odds of a star player at 1 vs 2 or 3 is much higher)
No matter what your plan is, you always need to draft well. That is the differnce between Edmonton and the teams that have won.
But your no matter what the plan is, all teams most years have picks and the teams that draft well usually are good teams. But the teams that get high end stars and draft very well win the cup. You need both.
The Flames have been top 10 IMO drafting outside the 1st round in the past decade or so. Carolina and Tampa are top 2 and Dallas might be 3rd. If the Flames rebuild, hopefully the drafting continues or even improves with extra picks. This team isn't good because we don't have stars
Look at how their respective teams performed in the standings/playoffs year over year also. These players listed were all on perennial playoff teams and often fighting for division spots.
If drafting top 1/2 gives the Flames a shot at being a perennial playoff team with a few conference finals appearances / stanley cup finals appearances, why wouldn't we try that? Doing what the Flames have been doing has obviously not worked.
I'm not arguing against a rebuild here. IMO it's the right course of action.
That said, it's far from a sure thing. There were a lot of 1st overall misses, and teams that sucked at rebuilding. The Islanders(Tavares) have mostly been a bubble team IMO. The Oilers traded Hall for nothing, sent Yak to the KHL, and have 2 years of McDavid left. Buffalo has been in a continuous rebuild, and traded Eichel. Ekblad is on LTIR, and Florida fans were saying he was a pylon last year. The rangers became a perennial playoff team despite Laff not because of him, though he looks much better this year.
Kadri has been living up to his contract this year. As the cap goes up, his percentage of hit against the cap will be pretty reasonable. Also, if the Flames want to turnaround faster than four years, you actually need some 30+ players who can carry the teams tough assignments. So, Lindholm should go.
Huska talked about it yesterday a little and I noticed it as well. Kadri is a very communicative player with his line mates. I think he deserves some credit for how guys like Zary and Pospisil have adjusted to the NHL.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
