This is a rebuild

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

There was, in fact, a CBA negotiation back in 2020, which resulted in the existing CBA being extended until 2026. There were no compliance buyouts, because there was nothing new to comply with.

I don't think it's a sure thing that there will be compliance buyouts in the future. It happened in 2005 because the players' share of HRR was capped at 57% (it had been somewhere around 70). It happened in 2013 because the players' share was cut to 50%. I don't think the owners are willing to lose revenue to a lockout on the chance of going lower than that.

Yes, the give then was that the players would have multiple years to payback what they owed under the CBA due to COVID and in fact would continue to receive most of their money regardless of HRR over the next couple years. There was no need for compliance buyouts because that was the financial give to the players.

The owners are going to want things, whether it is closing NCAA loopholes, reduced NTC/NMC, tightening of what is considered HRR, continued exclusion of franchise value of the hockey team as having any relationship to HRR. They will have something or some things. I suspect the give they give the players to try to get these things is more money in the short term, it has been the traditional carrot.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Zary has potential for sure. So far he seems like the most probable to become a top 6 forward but he still has a lot to prove. Pelletier and Pospisil look like they could be decent middle/bottom 6 guys. Valimaki is a bottom 6 if he's playing on a decent roster. Dube never really lived up to his potential. Bottom 6 guy. Wolf time will tell..

Nothing wrong with these guys but if we're claiming 2nd best drafting in the league nothing really stands out. Fox never playing a game definitely makes it seem worse. The Flames have drafted well for depth but are missing a few home runs that they will need if they plan on a quick turnaround. Hopefully from Honzek, Zary, Coronato, 2024 1st you have a couple legit top 6 forwards.

Not claiming. it's a 3rd party objective analysis.
If you are going to refute it - do it with data. Someone did the work to actually quantify normalized for picks.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Yes, it can certainly be remedied quickly, but it sure feels like a daunting task ATM when you consider the Flames have been looking for a true #1C for like 35 years and the only true #1D they drafted in the last 20+ years didn't even play a game for them because he decided he was going to be a Ranger and that's that.

Monahan was a true #1C for a bit even if he was flawed a bit and then injuries really derailed him.

But that's how you get those guys - top 10 (and really top 5) picks.

Which the Flames generally don't ever have.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

It won't save cap space either. The calculations involved are needlessly complicated, but what it boils down to is that if Huberdeau gets a dollar, it counts against the cap whether he is on the team or not.

According to CapFriendly, if the Flames bought Huberdeau out this summer, over 90% of his remaining contract would still count against the cap. There would be three years in which his cap hit after the buyout would still be $10.4 million.

There's absolutely no point in buying him out unless, as other posters have suggested, the league hands out more compliance buyouts with the next CBA.

So the conclusion is - people should quit whining about his salary and focus on what makes him play well, and help the team. IMO it's been coming around. His fancy stats were the best on the team last game. That must mean something.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Not claiming. it's a 3rd party objective analysis.
If you are going to refute it - do it with data. Someone did the work to actually quantify normalized for picks.

We all know the data: ‘Therefore, the Flames suck.’

You can put whatever argument you like in front of that conclusion, and for some people that will always be good enough.

[TheScorpion]

The guy I would be looking to take on is Korpisalo from Ottawa. He's got some term on his deal but his AAV is very manageable ($4 million) and there's a good goalie in there. Either he turns it around and you can flip him or you buy him out.

Trade Markstrom for assets. Add more assets to take on Korpisalo's contract. There's your tandem partner for Wolf.

I'd he'd waive for Ottawa, you could maybe even do something like Markstrom for Korpisalo, 1st, 2nd, Pinto.

[Goriders]

Read on TSN that the Flames are focussing on the process. Reading between the lines I read that as we’re not going to win many more games this year.

Crazy how many of the trades had zero impact like Toffoli, Zadorov and Lindholm. But that there was a cliff after the Hanifin and Tanev trades. I wondered if they would find a line.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Goriders

Read on TSN that the Flames are focussing on the process. Reading between the lines I read that as we’re not going to win many more games this year.

Crazy how many of the trades had zero impact like Toffoli, Zadorov and Lindholm. But that there was a cliff after the Hanifin and Tanev trades. I wondered if they would find a line.

Makes sense.

Toffoli -> Sharangovich at worst a wash
Zadorov -> bottom pairing Dman so who cares really, minutes absorbed with Shilly eventually added as well
Lindholm -> Kuzmenko again pretty much a wash with Lindholm deteriorating


No replacing your 1B pairing mid season though, the wheels falling off at this point was inevitable really.

Hopefully Miro/Okhotiuk/Shilly can come close with more practice time

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Nurse is the worst contract in the NHL, at least Huberdeau does actually do something besides hurt his team.

Campbell sends a postcard from Bakersfield. It says, ‘Hold my beer.’

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

If you want to provide an alternative actual analysis please go ahead.
Otherwise your view is simply an application of your own biases, and based on an even more flawed and limited data set.

I've provided data.

You can counter with actual data.

I haven’t seen another study, but this one is flawed. They discount one team cause “too many early picks” and then prop another up because “not enough picks”. Flawed method, not bias. That analysis is actually a great example of manipulating data find a desired outcome. I wish there were more studies of drafting, but I think you only need to see the impact of drafted players on their organizations to figure out who is good and who is bad. Winning is the greater indicator of success.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

I haven’t seen another study, but this one is flawed. They discount one team cause “too many early picks” and then prop another up because “not enough picks”.

Wrong!

The whole purpose, as I already explained to you, is to isolate the skill of the scouting staff by equalizing for the number and quality of picks each team had available. OF COURSE that's the method they use.

Winning is the greater indicator of success.

But winning is not an indicator of drafting and development skill, because it is not the only factor that determines success.

You are being remarkably obtuse about this.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Wrong!

The whole purpose, as I already explained to you, is to isolate the skill of the scouting staff by equalizing for the number and quality of picks each team had available. OF COURSE that's the method they use.



But winning is not an indicator of drafting and development skill, because it is not the only factor that determines success.

You are being remarkably obtuse about this.

Remarkably obtuse, or just the normal amount?

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Remarkably obtuse, or just the normal amount?

To be fair, the normal amount, in this case, is pretty remarkable. But I think this bit of obtusity goes above and beyond the call.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

To be fair, the normal amount, in this case, is pretty remarkable. But I think this bit of obtusity goes above and beyond the call.

Yes, I meant the normal amount for him of course

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Was he selling himself as a franchise player?

At the moment, Huberdeau's salary is the 11th highest in the NHL. Here are the players ahead of him:

McKinnon
McDavid
Panarin
Matthews
Karlsson
Pastrnak
Doughty
Tavares
Marner
Price

After the top four, I'm not seeing any franchise players on that list. A lot of franchises haven't got anyone that could be fairly described as a franchise player. Some franchise players are on older contracts, signed when the cap was smaller, and therefore making less money. Some guys who are definitely not franchise players were signed to big-money deals in the expectation of the cap going up sharply (which is scheduled to happen starting next year).

The Flames overpaid Huberdeau, not because they expected him to score 115 points every season, but because they were deathly afraid of the PR hit they would take by losing their best forward to free agency two years running. (This was a legitimate fear.) His agent was smart enough to advise his client to shut up and take the money. Should he have held out for less?

They might not be/have performed like franchise players, but that entire list was players who were paid under the assumption they would be franchise players.

Maybe the label "franchise" isn't totally clear. I would 100% take Pastrnak at his current salary though. That's the type of player who will turn a franchise around. And unlike Huberdeau, he put up a season equally as impressive after signing the contract as the one that he put up before signing the contract.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by blankall

They might not be/have performed like franchise players, but that entire list was players who were paid under the assumption they would be franchise players.

The Leafs already had Matthews when they signed Tavares. The Kings had Kopitar for years before Doughty ever played a game for them, and signed Kopitar to his current contract years before Doughty signed his.

The Bruins had Marchand, Krejci, and Bergeron at forward alone when Pastrnak became a core player, and haven't been the same since losing their top two centres. We've seen what's liable to happen when a team tries to build around a winger.

Maybe the label "franchise" isn't totally clear. I would 100% take Pastrnak at his current salary though. That's the type of player who will turn a franchise around.

How can you tell? He's never been in a position where he had to.

And unlike Huberdeau, he put up a season equally as impressive after signing the contract as the one that he put up before signing the contract.

Unlike Huberdeau, he did not change teams when he signed the contract.

[dissentowner]

There are a couple guys they are going to have to sit down at the end of the year to figure out if they want to stay, the one I am most curious about is Michael Backlund. He has said before he only has a few years left, I wonder if he is a guy that indicates he wants to move on and who gets the C if he does.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

I haven’t seen another study, but this one is flawed. They discount one team cause “too many early picks” and then prop another up because “not enough picks”. Flawed method, not bias. That analysis is actually a great example of manipulating data find a desired outcome. I wish there were more studies of drafting, but I think you only need to see the impact of drafted players on their organizations to figure out who is good and who is bad. Winning is the greater indicator of success.

What do you think their desired outcome was?

[Goriders]

If you take the lineup from last night plus injured players you come to around $67.25 million if you trade Markstrom.

The cap next year is expected to be around $87.5 million.

Conman is going to have a lot of flexibility this offseason to set the flames up for the future. I’m excited to see what he has up his sleeve.

[All In Good Time]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

There are a couple guys they are going to have to sit down at the end of the year to figure out if they want to stay, the one I am most curious about is Michael Backlund. He has said before he only has a few years left, I wonder if he is a guy that indicates he wants to move on and who gets the C if he does.

You have to think these discussions will be had with Kadri, Weegar and Coleman too. The prospect of Weegar wanting to move on and leaving us with only 1 experienced defensemen signed for next season is interesting