2014/2015 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[sureLoss]

Giving Williams an insane cap hit might make him impossible to trade to another team as a rental in his final year.

Also probably draws the ire of the other teams for putting the market out of whack for near retirement players.

[stemit14]

Originally Posted by H2SO4(aq)

What about the idea of signing a guy like Williams to ridiculous $$ and short term? Would he bite?

Doesn't put us in cap jail when its time to sign all the kids. Gives him great financial stability for say 2 years which he can invest and grow interest on the rest of his life. Gives kids like Poirier a chance to develop to hopefully take over his role down the road.

somethings like 15mill for 2 years. give him 10 the first and 5 the next so 7.5 AAV.

Somewhat absurd concept, but thoughts? Considered cap circumvention?

Didn't they put in a rule preventing salary from changing that much from year to year under the new CBA?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by stemit14

Didn't they put in a rule preventing salary from changing that much from year to year under the new CBA?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yeah the salary can't decrease by more than 35% in any given year I think. Also the lowest year cant be less than 50% of the highest paid year

[dying4acup]

I'm curious why so many are suggesting adding another vet forward.

If my count is right, adding 1 forward would push a player like Bennett or Ferland out of the lineup, and a player like Bennett/Shore/Granlund off the team.

I know everybody has visions of Raymond disappearing, but I see him getting a chance to at least start the season in Calgary, with a leash the length of Setogucci.

[Phanuthier]

Cause some cap space + UFAs are like giving a bored rich house wife a credit card LOL

[H2SO4(aq)]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Giving Williams an insane cap hit might make him impossible to trade to another team as a rental in his final year.

Also probably draws the ire of the other teams for putting the market out of whack for near retirement players.

Could we not just retain some of that cap if we were to trade him? If hypothetically he was signed at 8 for 1 year, we trade him at the deadline with 3 mill retained, does it not just count for that one year?

Not majorly concerned with what other teams think of it, it's business. Also, it's a slightly unprecedented way of providing depth while managing your cap effectively.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by dying4acup

If my count is right, adding 1 forward would push a player like Bennett or Ferland out of the lineup, and a player like Bennett/Shore/Granlund off the team.

There is room for 2 goaltenders, 7 D, and 14 Forwards:

Granlund can pass through to the AHL, but the following forwards will need to clear waivers should we keep them on board:

Gaudreau
Monahan
Hudler
Bouma
Backlund
Jones
Ferland
Bennett
Jooris
Colborne
Stajan
Byron
Bollig
Shore
Raymond

So at 15 bodies we're already a forward extra as it is. In addition, the following also need to clear waivers AFAIK:

Wolf
Elson
Reinhart
Hanowski
Van Brabant

Though they should all clear most likely, and some of them probably don't return.. Still, I really hope it's Raymond or Bollig and not Shore or Byron that get the axe.

[Roof-Daddy]

Arnold and Agostino??

Need to clear waivers already?

Really??

That doesn't seem right.

[CKPThunder]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

There is room for 2 goaltenders, 7 D, and 14 Forwards:

Granlund can pass through to the AHL, but the following forwards will need to clear waivers should we keep them on board:

Gaudreau
Monahan
Hudler
Bouma
Backlund
Jones
Ferland
Bennett
Jooris
Colborne
Stajan
Byron
Bollig
Shore
Raymond

So at 15 bodies we're already a forward extra as it is. In addition, the following also need to clear waivers AFAIK:

Bill Arnold
Wolf
Agostino
Elson
Reinhart
Hanowski
Van Brabant

Though they should all clear most likely, and some of them probably don't return.. Still, I really hope it's Raymond or Bollig and not Shore or Byron that get the axe.

I thought all players on an ELC were exempt from waivers? Where did you get this list cause it seems a bit off.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Arnold and Agostino??

Need to clear waivers already?

Really??

That doesn't seem right.

okay let's see, Agostino was 21 and Arnold was 22 when they were signed. Both have 3 seasons (including the 2013-14 season) before they need to clear waivers. So you're right. They can be sent down no problem. Both will be on second contracts though.

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Arnold and Agostino??

Need to clear waivers already?

Really??

That doesn't seem right.

They don't... they have another year or 72 NHL games for Agostino, 79 NHL games for Arnold which ever happens first.

[sureLoss]

nevermind

[blender]

Does the almost-certainty of an expansion draft upcoming in the next calender year have an impact on any team's asset-management planning?

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by blender

Does the almost-certainty of an expansion draft upcoming in the next calender year have an impact on any team's asset-management planning?

Without having any clue as to how an expansion draft would work in the salary cap era, how could they plan for it?

Otherwise I imagine you leave your worst contracts unprotected and hope the expansion teams take them off your hands.

[stemit14]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Without having any clue as to how an expansion draft would work in the salary cap era, how could they plan for it?

Does anyone know if the expansion team would be given an automatic high pick or something? Has that been done in the past?

[dying4acup]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

There is room for 2 goaltenders, 7 D, and 14 Forwards:

Granlund can pass through to the AHL, but the following forwards will need to clear waivers should we keep them on board:

Gaudreau
Monahan
Hudler
Bouma
Backlund
Jones
Ferland
Bennett
Jooris
Colborne
Stajan
Byron
Bollig
Shore
Raymond

So at 15 bodies we're already a forward extra as it is. In addition, the following also need to clear waivers AFAIK:

Bill Arnold
Wolf
Agostino
Elson
Reinhart
Hanowski
Van Brabant

Though they should all clear most likely, and some of them probably don't return.. Still, I really hope it's Raymond or Bollig and not Shore or Byron that get the axe.

Thanks for the list.

Sad to say, I doubt Byron is given a QO. But like last year, this won't necessarily preclude a return.

I really don't see the need to add a vet forward this year, unless he's under 27 and we can get him for a reasonable cost, for some term.
I honestly see the Flames seeking a trade of some young forward(s) to acquire young defense.

Ideally we could add 2 top 4 defensemen, push Russell and Wideman to the third pair, Engellend to number 7, and have a really balanced top 6.

If we do that, and see more improvement from our young forwards, I could see an additional playoff round or 2 in 2016 as realistic.

[H2SO4(aq)]

Originally Posted by stemit14

Does anyone know if the expansion team would be given an automatic high pick or something? Has that been done in the past?

God do i ever wish Vegas was picking first in this draft...

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by stemit14

Does anyone know if the expansion team would be given an automatic high pick or something? Has that been done in the past?

In 2000, Wild and Columbus picked 3 & 4 respectively.
In 1999, Thrashers had #2 but traded up to #1
In 1998, Nashville had #2

So yes they do get high picks, but they don't get the top pick.

[stemit14]

Would be crazy to see a team tank for a top pick only to be bumped down a spot by an expansion team. Especially if next years draft is like this year where 1 and 2 are much better prospects than the next tier.

[Lanny_McDonald]

I would prefer the Flames targeted a quality defense man and let the forward ranks shakeout with what is in the system. Flames have a lot of good young talent that needs an opportunity to shine. The Flames should be beating the weeds to find a good defense man that could play for the team for the next seven to ten years.