[News] Bouma, Byron, and Jooris and 20 other players file for Salary Arbitration

[Bingo]

I think a one year deal at 1.75 is perfect for both parties. Doubles his salary, and then he truly gets paid as a 3rd line player if he puts up 13-15 goals again.

If he reverts back to 7 then he gets extended for similar money. Right now the shooting percentage really sticks out

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I think a one year deal at 1.75 is perfect for both parties. Doubles his salary, and then he truly gets paid as a 3rd line player if he puts up 13-15 goals again.

If he reverts back to 7 then he gets extended for similar money. Right now the shooting percentage really sticks out

I imagine the hangup is that one of the parties (Bouma presumably) wants a long term deal and will only take a one year deal unless they can't come to an agreement and are forced to by arbitration.

I guess there is a chance Flames looking to lock him in a value contract for a few years but I think what you describe is exactly what the Flames want.

[shotinthebacklund]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I think a one year deal at 1.75 is perfect for both parties. Doubles his salary, and then he truly gets paid as a 3rd line player if he puts up 13-15 goals again.

If he reverts back to 7 then he gets extended for similar money. Right now the shooting percentage really sticks out

This is why the flames might be ok with whatever the arbitrator decides. I would imagine the flames selected one year. Might be the best for both parties

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I love Lance Bouma. The guy is a warrior and an important cog in the team that we saw on the ice last year.

But you have to hold the line on support players or they get priced off of good teams. I want Bouma to do well, but if the Flames just gave him 2.25 and called it a day, we'd be seeing the last of Bouma in a year or two as he'd have to ply his trade on a weaker team that can afford to pay more for a middle six forward that scored 8-11 goals a season.

Holding the line now keeps him here for 5 years where he belongs.

If he's 2.5 in 2 years the Flames will have to promote a younger option, ... contending teams have young players filling in the bottom 4-5 forward roles.

You may be right but the Flames just committed to 4.3 x 5 to a support player, a middle 6 forward. And there was a general happy dance at CP.

They also have Raymond at 3.1 for yet another 2 years and Stajan for 3.125 for 3.

So all the sudden the Flames are going to hold the line on Bouma?

What is his status after a 1 year arbitration hearing? If he is a UFA and plays to the same level at 2014-15 he is on his way out next year.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

You may be right but the Flames just committed to 4.3 x 5 to a support player, a middle 6 forward. And there was a general happy dance at CP.

They also have Raymond at 3.1 for yet another 2 years and Stajan for 3.125 for 3.

So all the sudden the Flames are going to hold the line on Bouma?

Flawed logic.
1. RFA v. UFA
2. Don't use bad contracts to justify handing out another bad contract.

[codynw]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Flawed logic.
1. RFA v. UFA
2. Don't use bad contracts to justify handing out another bad contract.

3. Frolik is a lot better than Bouma.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

You may be right but the Flames just committed to 4.3 x 5 to a support player, a middle 6 forward. And there was a general happy dance at CP.

Frolik is a better player then Bouma with a longer track record.

Originally Posted by ricardodw

They also have Raymond at 3.1 for yet another 2 years and Stajan for 3.125 for 3.

So all the sudden the Flames are going to hold the line on Bouma?

So you're saying that because the Flames made a mistake on Raymond and Stajan they should make another mistake on Bouma?

Originally Posted by ricardodw

What is his status after a 1 year arbitration hearing?

He's a member of the Calgary Flames for the 2015-2016 Season

Originally Posted by ricardodw

If he is a UFA and plays to the same level at 2014-15 he is on his way out next year.

He's 25, he'll be an RFA again after next year.

[wingmaker]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Flawed logic.
1. RFA v. UFA
2. Don't use bad contracts to justify handing out another bad contract.

I don't think either Stajan or Frolik are bad contracts. At some point, they may be over paid if their role is significantly reduced of if a younger player replaces them, but even as a reduced minute fourth line centre last year, Stajan was money down the stretch and in the playoffs.

Bouma just hasn't proven what those guys have yet. Treliving clearly seems to want to see more before a big commitment. Nothing wrong with that, I don't think.

As for Raymond, it has already been mentioned in this thread, the Flames were in a completely different position last summer. If things had gone more as expected this year with another rebuilding year, Raymond and his dollars probably wouldn't seem that terrible. Problem is, the kids are better quicker than anyone thought and they're leaving him in their dust. Doesn't really affect Bouma's situation at all.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I don't really care about any of this as Lance Bouma to me is a complementary player and if the Hawks have shown anything over the years it's that they never get attached to these guys as their prime concern it holding on to their core players as long as you have them you can rotate your bottom six in and out as necessary. Bouma is a nice player to have but not a necessity as this team is going to sink or swim on the backs of Monahan, Gadreau, Bennet, Hudler, Hamilton and you can't overpay for shot blockers.

What I do care though is that the arbitrator makes the decision as soon as possible so I don't have to hear the 960 guys spend hours on Lance Bouma daily as it's getting really hard to listen to.

Chicago has shown that they can make the right moves after winning a cup when they are forced to make these moves because of the cap. But before they win the cup they stock pile players that contribute at a high level well beyond their core. This is why they are so successful. Its not just that they keep the right core in place but they develop and acquire very good depth prior to winning their cups

Less moving parts is always better. Its like people think that Chicago is the only team that keeps its core together. Pittsburgh has for the most part but they fail the last 6-7 years because they don't draft well and they constantly are buyers at the trade deadline and leave themselves no chance to draft well and develop players. The also consistently trade for wingers to play with Sid and Geno when clearly they could use the money and assets they spend on these wingers on defence help

Bouma for 2 million on a 3-4 year deal is a steal. I know you can't compare UFA contracts to RFA but once a player is signed its all about cap hit vs production and Raymond at 3.15 is no longer needed. Bouma brings way more to the table for way less which is why teams that win develop young players because RFA's are always cheaper than UFAs

Bouma is a UFA in 2 years. Wrap him up now as he will only get more expensive

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Profit?

That's better. And the profit comes from running a big and complicated entertainment business conglomerate, which among other criteria contributing to its success, must have satisfied customers, who enjoy the quality of the entertainment product being provided on many levels (winning games, community involvement, quality players, entertaining games, good watching experience at the arena and elsewhere etc.). And all of that combined has to cost less than the amount of revenue brought in to keep the team profitable.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I love Lance Bouma. The guy is a warrior and an important cog in the team that we saw on the ice last year.

But you have to hold the line on support players or they get priced off of good teams. I want Bouma to do well, but if the Flames just gave him 2.25 and called it a day, we'd be seeing the last of Bouma in a year or two as he'd have to ply his trade on a weaker team that can afford to pay more for a middle six forward that scored 8-11 goals a season.

Holding the line now keeps him here for 5 years where he belongs.

If he's 2.5 in 2 years the Flames will have to promote a younger option, ... contending teams have young players filling in the bottom 4-5 forward roles.

While I generally agree with all of this, the flip side is that if you take too much of a hard line on him, he is probably gone in 2 years. And remember, the Flames already gave him one show-me contract - and he absolutely did show them with a fantastic season.

Yes, he's a bottom 6er. But if he proves that the 15 goals wasn't a one-time, shooting percentage thing, then he is really difficult to replace and we've lost a really valuable player.

One other point...

While I completely agree about bottom 6ers being replaceable, there are certain heart and soul guys that define teams and are not replaceable. I think of guys like Bobby Nystrom and Butch Goring. They defined the Islanders. Bob Gainey never scored more than 15 goals in a season but was one of the most important players on the late 70s Habs.

I am not saying that Bouma is as good, or as valuable, as those players. What I am saying is that he brings something to the team, other than his bottom 6 role, that helps shape and define the team.

And that is extremely hard to replace.

[Finger Cookin]

Bob Gainey was a 4 time 20 goal scorer and scored 15 or more goals in 9 different seasons in his 16 year career.

[Karl]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

While I generally agree with all of this, the flip side is that if you take too much of a hard line on him, he is probably gone in 2 years. And remember, the Flames already gave him one show-me contract - and he absolutely did show them with a fantastic season.

Yes, he's a bottom 6er. But if he proves that the 15 goals wasn't a one-time, shooting percentage thing, then he is really difficult to replace and we've lost a really valuable player.

One other point...

While I completely agree about bottom 6ers being replaceable, there are certain heart and soul guys that define teams and are not replaceable. I think of guys like Bobby Nystrom and Butch Goring. They defined the Islanders. Bob Gainey never scored more than 15 goals in a season but was one of the most important players on the late 70s Habs.

I am not saying that Bouma is as good, or as valuable, as those players. What I am saying is that he brings something to the team, other than his bottom 6 role, that helps shape and define the team.

And that is extremely hard to replace.

Wikipedia disagrees with the bolded.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Gainey

[bax]

Originally Posted by Macho0978

Chicago has shown that they can make the right moves after winning a cup when they are forced to make these moves because of the cap. But before they win the cup they stock pile players that contribute at a high level well beyond their core. This is why they are so successful. Its not just that they keep the right core in place but they develop and acquire very good depth prior to winning their cups

Less moving parts is always better. Its like people think that Chicago is the only team that keeps its core together. Pittsburgh has for the most part but they fail the last 6-7 years because they don't draft well and they constantly are buyers at the trade deadline and leave themselves no chance to draft well and develop players. The also consistently trade for wingers to play with Sid and Geno when clearly they could use the money and assets they spend on these wingers on defence help

Bouma for 2 million on a 3-4 year deal is a steal. I know you can't compare UFA contracts to RFA but once a player is signed its all about cap hit vs production and Raymond at 3.15 is no longer needed. Bouma brings way more to the table for way less which is why teams that win develop young players because RFA's are always cheaper than UFAs

Bouma is a UFA in 2 years. Wrap him up now as he will only get more expensive

Quoting because this is an excellent post

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Flawed logic.
1. RFA v. UFA
2. Don't use bad contracts to justify handing out another bad contract.

The discussion was what you are going to be paying non-core players.

Is there some sort of rule that you have to sign UFAs to inflated contracts.

Bingo was arguing for keeping the price down on Bouma.... interchangeable bargain/value parts

Is Frolik a core player on a team that has

Monahan/Bennett/Gaudreau/Hamilton/Brodie/Gio and maybe Hudler or Wideman?

Was Frolik a core player on the Jets who had Stempniak/Tlusty/Slater as the 3rd line for the Jets in the playoff run/playoffs.

Is Frolik going to improve and Bouma regress?

Is Frolik going to be that much of an upgrade on:

Jooris/Granlund/Ferland/Bouma/Arnold/Colborne that the Flames were forced to pay a premium to get him?

I can see trying to save a bit on Bouma to keep Russell, but it just is a somewhat funny place to take a stand after free spending over the last two off seasons on non-core players.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

And remember, the Flames already gave him one show-me contract

You know, I've seen this claim thrown about but why was his last deal was a "show me" contract? I mean his last deal was completed after he put out a 5G/10A season playing limited minutes... considering his lack of leverage his last deal was pretty fair and he's basically going to get a 100% raise out of it even if the Flames win the arb hearing.

Regardless, even if last years contract was a "show me" contract what he's now being asked to "show me" is different then what he was asked to show before.

[Enoch Root]

Was going by memory on Gainey - should have looked it up.

Doesn't change the point.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Parallex

You know, I've seen this claim thrown about but why was his last deal was a "show me" contract? I mean his last deal was completed after he put out a 5G/10A season playing limited minutes... considering his lack of leverage his last deal was pretty fair and he's basically going to get a 100% raise out of it even if the Flames win the arb hearing.

Regardless, even if last years contract was a "show me" contract what he's now being asked to "show me" is different then what he was asked to show before.

Sure. But the point remains: they are risking alienating him.

It's only human nature. When you are constantly doubted by your bosses, you're probably more likely to start seeking employment elsewhere.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Is Frolik going to be that much of an upgrade on:

Jooris/Granlund/Ferland/Bouma/Arnold/Colborne that the Flames were forced to pay a premium to get him?

The answer relative to the NHL players you listed is "Yes" and relative to the Prospects the answer is "Probably".

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

It's only human nature. When you are constantly doubted by your bosses, you're probably more likely to start seeking employment elsewhere.

... he's going to be getting at least a 100% raise. I wish my bosses doubted me enough to give me a 100% raise.