Quote:
Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent
Again, isn't taking on bad cap the other way a possibility to navigate around retention?
|
My guess is the Carolina deal would have been no retention but with a bad contract coming back but he wouldn't waive to go there.
That would be the preferred scenario for sure but I'm not sure how many teams have a bad contract with 2-3 years of term left that are also looking to move for Kadri.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
I just don't get all the assumptions as fact.
I hope they find a way to do it without retention or get a bump in the Coleman offer that doesn't require retention and they do Kadri with.
But I don't think they are flippant to say we have to take the risk of a 3 year loss of a slot and the buy out implications.
|
They would have all that data right now IMO because I don't think the offers or the situation gets better in the offseason for Kadri.
They would have all the offers on the table. They would know if they had bad contracts they could take in return or if they would require retention.
I think my point is more the Flames would have all the data they need to make the decision right now, and I don't think it changes a ton in the offseason. And it feels like the market is telling them they need to retain on the player if they want to move him.
The reality is I don't think you're getting a great return for Kadri unless you are either willing to retain, or take back a bad contract, and that's not going to change.
Edit: Actually there are maybe two teams that could change things a bit in the offseason...if the Kings and Leafs shed players and stockpile picks now they might be interested in Kadri in the offseason. But I'm not sure I'd bank on that.