[Rumour] Kylington to test free agency

[BigThief]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

3 or more years makes more sense for the Flames to walk away IMO.

I doubt they would have walked away from 2 years which was why I said it was weird before, but if Kylington is asking for 3+ then I could see why they would have been hesitant to do that.

(I still would have been fine with 3 years depending on the cap hit, but get why the team would be hesitant)

If the Flames signed Kylington for 2mill for three years I'd be totally fine with that.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

One has to wonder why Calgary is offering more money than any other team in these contracts?

Small Canadian market tax.

[Rhett44]

Originally Posted by BigThief

If the Flames signed Kylington for 2mill for three years I'd be totally fine with that.

Same, but I really like the player and think he has a lot of potential.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Mental illness is different. People who go through traumatic experiences, that usually does not leave you.

I have heard from someone what lead to him leaving, I am not sure if its 100% accurate, but if its true than it's just not that simple.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

One has to wonder why Calgary is offering more money than any other team in these contracts?

Lindholm probably thought he was going to bounce back and then the offer was pulled before he could circle back and if I was Hanifin I wouldn't want to re-sign on a team that was guaranteed to suck for three years.

The Flames didn't offer more on Toffoli, Tanev, or Zadorov.

[BigThief]

Originally Posted by Rhett44

Same, but I really like the player and think he has a lot of potential.

Even if he never gets better that's good value for a bottom pairing defender who can move the puck as well as he can.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by BigThief

Even if he never gets better that's good value for a bottom pairing defender who can move the puck as well as he can.

you are assuming he plays those three years, like it or not there is a major risk he doesn't

like I said a guy who played 33 games the last two years because of a knee injury doesn't get 3 year deals. I pretty confident that no NHL team would give him 3x2M, so why should the Flames?

If he gets his 3x2M I will come here and admit he made the right call, then we can debate if the team that gave it to him did.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by dino7c

you are assuming he plays those three years, like it or not there is a major risk he doesn't

The worst of it is, you can't quantify that risk. Is it 10%? 50%? 90%? You never can tell.

[Finger Cookin]

Originally Posted by cannon7

48 hours later, is Kylington wondering if he made the right decision?

His agent had to know the best he was going to get is a "show me" deal, right?

He signed in August last contract, he may just as content to sign in August this year.

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by Rhett44

Same, but I really like the player and think he has a lot of potential.

2M is fine but what potential are you talking about?

He is 27. He is what he is. He is lucky just to be a regular everyday player

[Zary's-Mustache]

Anything more than one year makes 0 sense for the Flames or any other team.

I would bet my house he doesn't get more than one year.

He'll likely sign in Calgary with his tail between his legs or else end up on a PTO.

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by Bingo

You're talking the risk / reward of signing the player from a Flame's standpoint.

I was talking about who took the risk from the player's view ... the player or the agent.

I did not parse that from your post

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

He signed in August last contract, he may just as content to sign in August this year.

And didn't make it to camp

[NegativeSpace]

I don’t think it is fair to compare a situation of someone with indefinite employment to Oliver whose contract expired. I could see some people being upset if they chose not to tender an offer, which would be within their rights. The Flames were willing to make an offer and Oliver rejected it. I don’t see what part could be criticized of the Flames. They have to look at the agreement like it is any other negotiation and assign a value to the player. It sounded like Seravelli also thinks Oliver’s agent overplayed his hand so it’s not just Dino saying that. If this was a concussion that kept him out for 1.5 years then people would be very upset if he was signed long term. Look at everyone who said there were concerns with Tanev’s contract when he signed with Calgary or even the new one with Toronto. The ability of a player to sustain and provide value during the contract has to be part of the contract negotiation process.

[Electricprez]

Originally Posted by NegativeSpace

I don’t think it is fair to compare a situation of someone with indefinite employment to Oliver whose contract expired. I could see some people being upset if they chose not to tender an offer, which would be within their rights. The Flames were willing to make an offer and Oliver rejected it. I don’t see what part could be criticized of the Flames. They have to look at the agreement like it is any other negotiation and assign a value to the player. It sounded like Seravelli also thinks Oliver’s agent overplayed his hand so it’s not just Dino saying that. If this was a concussion that kept him out for 1.5 years then people would be very upset if he was signed long term. Look at everyone who said there were concerns with Tanev’s contract when he signed with Calgary or even the new one with Toronto. The ability of a player to sustain and provide value during the contract has to be part of the contract negotiation process.

THIS.

Yes, we want to 'treat this like an injury' and not come with bias toward mental health, sure. I think acknowledging and helping with mental health issues is an important and wonderful thing to do.

But if we're holding that same standard, would a player limited to 33 games in two years because of a lower back issue warrant a contract with immediate term? Not unless you see some insane upside, and with Oliver, it just isn't there.

They made an offer they felt made sense given the value and risk of the situation. Kylington said no.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Electricprez

THIS.

Yes, we want to 'treat this like an injury' and not come with bias toward mental health, sure. I think acknowledging and helping with mental health issues is an important and wonderful thing to do.

But if we're holding that same standard, would a player limited to 33 games in two years because of a lower back issue warrant a contract with immediate term? Not unless you see some insane upside, and with Oliver, it just isn't there.

They made an offer they felt made sense given the value and risk of the situation. Kylington said no.

I see kind of where dino is going, but the thing is, Mental Health is a lot more of a crap-shoot.

If its a back injury or knee injury or whatever, you more or less know what you're going to get in terms of recovery or healing. Its fairly standard and well documented.

Mental Health? Thats pure guess-work.

Its important, and should be treated as such, but if you're an NHL GM? You're gambling.

I agree with another poster, I dont think either party is 'in the wrong' here, there are just different priorities on both sides.

[dino7c]

SN has a list of the top FAs remaining and OK is nowhere to be found. I can assure you the guys on that list arent getting 3 year deals except maybe Sprong.

I don't think he did something "wrong" like morally or something I think he made a poor decision and overplayed his hand likely based on bad advice from his agent. I'm glad the Flames are no longer letting players run the show.

[hillspeak]

Very torn on the whole issue. At the end of the day neither side has a loyalty to each other especially in pro sports.

What if Oliver did have an offer for 2 years somewhere else but decided to take a Flames two year offer for slightly lower pay and he accepted because he felt he owed a debit? As we are in a re-tool/build and may not be in a playoff hunt and 1/2 way through the season Flames trade him to Team X..... Would fans be outraged at the Flames that he took a discount to stay and the Flames traded him to get a pick? I would assume we would be happy for him whatever team he ended up with and our memories would be short and be excited for who we pick in the draft..

Oliver has to look out for himself, cause the Flames and any pro sports organization would be looking after themselves.

Devils advocate: Tre was the GM when the original situation occurred and maybe he was the one had Oliver's back and who made the original call to continue paying etc.. Could Oliver feels he should be loyal to Tre?

[ResAlien]

I’m not torn at all. We’re all stocked up on 4-6 defenceman and without Tanev here to shelter him it’s so long and happy trails. Hopefully he finds a place where a good pairing matchup is available

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by hillspeak

Very torn on the whole issue. At the end of the day neither side has a loyalty to each other especially in pro sports.

What if Oliver did have an offer for 2 years somewhere else but decided to take a Flames two year offer for slightly lower pay and he accepted because he felt he owed a debit? As we are in a re-tool/build and may not be in a playoff hunt and 1/2 way through the season Flames trade him to Team X..... Would fans be outraged at the Flames that he took a discount to stay and the Flames traded him to get a pick? I would assume we would be happy for him whatever team he ended up with and our memories would be short and be excited for who we pick in the draft..

Oliver has to look out for himself, cause the Flames and any pro sports organization would be looking after themselves.

Devils advocate: Tre was the GM when the original situation occurred and maybe he was the one had Oliver's back and who made the original call to continue paying etc.. Could Oliver feels he should be loyal to Tre?

Kylington had a guaranteed contract and roster spot on the Calgary Flames.

Four days into free agency, he does not have either, and may have to attend a camp on a PTO.

That’s not “looking out for himself” that’s wildly overrating his own value and getting burned.