Rumour: Blake Coleman to Calgary

[Sofa GM]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Coleman would be a secondary piece, not part of the core.

That’s player at that price and term is too much for a secondary player

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by 1qqaaz

So I'm arguing for good asset management. No expensive contracts to old players, and no trading away draft picks for rentals. You're better off letting players walk if they're going to be overpaid. And you're better off trading rentals for picks.



The best way to win the cup is not to be an extremely good team for one year. Rather, it's to be a very good team for several years. If you have a 5% chance of winning the cup for 6 years, you'll have better odds of winning than a team that has a 10% chance of winning for 2 years.
Even good teams have to be good with their long term asset management.

Different sports, I realize, but what did you think of the move (asset management pov) when the Raptors traded for Leonard? He was gone the next year. Was that a good move?

[flamesgod]

Originally Posted by howard_the_duck

With a franchise center, franchise winger, and bonafide top D pairing.

Flames are short on all fronts.

Nothing to do with the context of what I was responding to at all.

[MrMike]

A basketball championship can be won by one or two players. We see this almost every year. Completely different asset management between the two sports.

[MikeMc]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

The winner of the Blake Coleman sweepstakes is destined to be a loser. I have no doubt that Treliving will be looking at giving him a 5 year deal because this is what bad GM's do. Tampa Bay keeps their core players and wins cups while bad organizations like the Flames overpay their role players to miss the playoffs.

That's oversimplifying things though. I think it's widely speculated that this franchise has marching orders to compete for the playoffs every year, we just brought in Sutter, we didn't move assets when we should have at the trade deadline last year, the track record of this franchise, etc.

If that is the mandate, then we will need to sign players that are will fill some of the current gaps we have - Top six winger, top four dman, backup goalie, depth winder, 4th line center, etc.

Mix in that we are not a favorite trade destination for most UFAs (we aren't a sexy big city, or a top contender, winters are nicer/don't exist elsewhere) and ya, they are gonna have to give out some money and term or just roll with the leftover scraps.

We might all agree 5 years for Coleman is too long, and there is a risk or history repeating itself with semi recent Flames UFA signings - but what's the alternative if the ownership group's mandate is to compete for the playoffs?

Tampa is in a position to take that stance. Unless we were to burn it down and start fresh, we are not.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by MrMike

A basketball championship can be won by one or two players. We see this almost every year. Completely different asset management between the two sports.

The larger point is as you put it winning championships. I'm not trying to impugn anyone but there is a trend where people seem to want pleasure from asset management or ideal salary as THE GOAL. I understand people think these things will lead to greater probability of winning a championship..

If I'm being honest, I didn't like moves that seemed to be short term but is it better for the franchise to win a championship and then have lean years or have a good team that makes the playoffs year after year but never wins it all.

[bubbsy]

My view on the topic of Coleman acquisition is as follows.

He's a very solid middle/bottom 6 player on a contending team. Teams that already have established top 6 players/core, can pay the acquisition costs for a player like this (ie. the high high price Tampa paid to obtain Coleman for their cup runs). I would argue, other contenders are better off paying for a guy like Coleman (if they have the cap to do so), as he provides a solid depth option for teams already set as far as their top level forward talent.

Where I think deals like this should be avoided is a average team, with a lack lustre top lines of talent. The flames need an obvious shakeup to their top 6 forwards, and a fairly dramatic upgrade at the C position in their top 2 lines. Spending big dollars on a depth forward, who I don't necessarily see as a solid top 6 forward seems like something this team would be regretting in pretty short order.

as such, if Coleman being signed is the 2nd biggest change made to the forward group this year, I might be intrigued. However, in isolation, it seems like a move that this flames team just aren't in a position to do, without regretting it pretty damn quick.

[InternationalVillager]

Originally Posted by MikeMc

We might all agree 5 years for Coleman is too long, and there is a risk or history repeating itself with semi recent Flames UFA signings - but what's the alternative if the ownership group's mandate is to compete for the playoffs?

We - as paying fans that are the reason for the existence of their business - come together as one and demonstrate that we do not agree with this direction that they have chosen for the team?

That would be the intelligent thing to do....but carry on. Let's keep making Troy Brouwer/James Neal-esque acquisitions/signings and expect magically different results.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Sofa GM

That’s player at that price and term is too much for a secondary player

Sure. But those are the breaks.

Any chance of us being Colorado or Tampa is 5-10 years out from us drafting a number one center, and given that there's no real guarantee we can do that, we have to make our window count with what we have in whatever way we can.

Colorado and Tampa aren't even built the same, even though you lumped them in together as the way "contenders do it."

Calgary has a higher percentage of cap going to drafted players than Colorado. Colorado has relied a lot on trades. Tampa and Boston are built very much through the draft. St.Louis was built through trades and signings. The Islanders are similar to Colorado. Vegas is... Vegas.

Something like what St.Louis did is attainable, though it's a roll of the dice like any other. They did get a cup out of it, though.

Only point being, there's no one path to the cup. And if you look at the winners and contenders over the last few years, that's pretty obvious.

[InternationalVillager]

Originally Posted by Goriders

Pelletier and Zary are probably a few years out.

Pelletier and Zary are not a few years out but this is the Flames organization that mandates that young players get in about 150-200 games in the AHL.

Caufield played 2 games in the AHL before playing NHL games and then into the playoffs.

I believe Pelletier can do the same/make the jump to the NHL this year. Zary - next year.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by InternationalVillager

Pelletier and Zary are not a few years out but this is the Flames organization that mandates that young players get in about 150-200 games in the AHL.

AHL games played by current roster players developed by the Flames:

Andrew Mangiapane, 120
Rasmus Andersson, 110
Oliver Kylington, 65
Mikael Backlund, 55
Dillon Dube, 44
Jusso Valimaki, 16
Johnny Gaudreau, 0
Sean Monahan, 0
Matthew Tkachuk, 0

If the organization has a mandate for players to play at least 150 AHL games, they are piss-poor at enforcing it.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

AHL games played by current roster players developed by the Flames:

Andrew Mangiapane, 120
Rasmus Andersson, 110
Oliver Kylington, 65
Mikael Backlund, 55
Dillon Dube, 44
Jusso Valimaki, 16
Johnny Gaudreau, 0
Sean Monahan, 0
Matthew Tkachuk, 0

If the organization has a mandate for players to play at least 150 AHL games, they are piss-poor at enforcing it.

Fire Treliving immediately!

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by InternationalVillager

Pelletier and Zary are not a few years out but this is the Flames organization that mandates that young players get in about 150-200 games in the AHL.

Caufield played 2 games in the AHL before playing NHL games and then into the playoffs.

I believe Pelletier can do the same/make the jump to the NHL this year. Zary - next year.

From what I saw at the world juniors (only time I’ve actually seen them play) I thought Pelletier was more ready than Zary.

He is a year older though so that would make sense

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

AHL games played by current roster players developed by the Flames:

Andrew Mangiapane, 120
Rasmus Andersson, 110
Oliver Kylington, 65
Mikael Backlund, 55
Dillon Dube, 44
Jusso Valimaki, 16
Johnny Gaudreau, 0
Sean Monahan, 0
Matthew Tkachuk, 0

If the organization has a mandate for players to play at least 150 AHL games, they are piss-poor at enforcing it.

Jankowski 78 (and remember how mad people were that it took that long).

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Jankowski 78 (and remember how mad people were that it took that long).

If we're going down that road:

Sam Bennett, 0 (and remember how mad people were that he didn't get any development time in the AHL)

[cannon7]

Think there was a deal and it was killed by ownership. This was not the player they were willing to mortgage the future. Pure speculation on my part.

[RedHawk12]

I actually think Coleman and Josh Anderson are very comparable. Coleman would definitely be a top 6 guy on our team and bring physicality and energy. Similar role in NJ where he put up 20+ goals. He was way down the depth chart in TB..I'm not sure about 6×5 though. 5×4 would make sense.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

If we're going down that road:

Sam Bennett, 0 (and remember how mad people were that he didn't get any development time in the AHL)

I think the people who say that are engaging in revisionist history. Same folks were excited about Hartley’s “caged tiger”.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by cannon7

Think there was a deal and it was killed by ownership. This was not the player they were willing to mortgage the future. Pure speculation on my part.

Ownership would not care in the slightest, nor get involved.

Ownership knows (and approves) that the team will spend to the cap every year. This won't change. How the team spends those cap dollars is up to management - this guy or that guy, it doesn't change the total expense.

[Lanny_McDonald]

What would you consider a reasonable contract for Coleman. I started looking at him as a 3rd line to 4th line player. I figured a tad over Derek Ryan's $3.125M was a decent number. If he bumps up to the 2nd to 3rd line, then maybe go to a similar Sam Bennett level deal? $4.4M seams reasonable? If they are talking $5M+ that means he has to be a 2nd line player for the entirety of his contract, which I can see happening. I think the team should top out at $4.5M. Anything more, look elsewhere.