It doesn’t have to be Montreal. I’m sure more teams would have been interested in a retained salary deal for Monahan.
well you can't be for one...you have no idea
also, the difference between Rooney and a league min player does not make enough of a difference in salary retention.
Teams near the cap with competitive rosters care about salary retention...teams taking cap dumps for assets don't care at all. Honestly its a ridiculous premise.
550k is the difference between Rooney and a league min player...550k salary retention doesn't move you from a 1st to a 2nd as the sweetener. Not to mention Monahan's 10 team trade list only leaves 9 teams other than Montreal, likely very few if any with the cap or the desire.
also, the difference between Rooney and a league min player does not make enough of a difference in salary retention.
Teams near the cap with competitive rosters care about salary retention...teams taking cap dumps for assets don't care at all. Honestly its a ridiculous premise.
550k is the difference between Rooney and a league min player...550k salary retention doesn't move you from a 1st to a 2nd as the sweetener. Not to mention Monahan's 10 team trade list.
It’s actually $1.3M, since Ruzicka is still going to be signed anyway. Instead we get to watch Rooney get 13 points instead of one of our own homegrown prospects blossoming in the NHL.
I’m not saying I’m right, it was a suggestion. And it’s not ridiculous.
It’s actually $1.3M, since Ruzicka is still going to be signed anyway. Instead we get to watch Rooney get 13 points instead of one of our own homegrown prospects blossoming in the NHL.
I’m not saying I’m right, it was a suggestion. And it’s not ridiculous.
It kinda is...even 1.3M isn't going to change Montreal's demands from a 1st to a 2nd. Why would it? makes no sense. They don't care about cap they care about the asset that is why they are taking a cap dump.
Also, nobody else was doing the deal...9 other possible teams, unlikely anyone else with the space or the desire. Teams like Arizona wouldn't have been on his list.
Its fine if you don't care for the signing but there is no point in making things up to make it worse
Why are you hung up on Montreal? Monahan at decreasing salary becomes increasingly attractive to more and more teams. At a certain salary there wouldn’t even be a need for the Flames to send the other team anything.
Why are you hung up on Montreal? Monahan at decreasing salary becomes increasingly attractive to more and more teams. At a certain salary there wouldn’t even be a need for the Flames to send the other team anything.
There are only 9 other possible teams in the NHL to trade him to...very unlikely many if any of them have the cap or the desire...Flames obviously shopped him around all summer.
anyone taking a cap dump for an asset cares more about the asset than 1M or whatever. A small retain on Monahan doesn't change things at all. If you think teams were taking a 5M Monahan for a second I think you are out to lunch.
Honestly its ridiculous to suggest Rooney had any effect on the Monahan trade, and I'm being nice.
__________________
GFG
Last edited by dino7c; 08-23-2022 at 02:29 AM.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to dino7c For This Useful Post:
It’s actually $1.3M, since Ruzicka is still going to be signed anyway. Instead we get to watch Rooney get 13 points instead of one of our own homegrown prospects blossoming in the NHL.
I’m not saying I’m right, it was a suggestion. And it’s not ridiculous.
It’s pretty clear Sutter doesn’t trust Ruzicka yet. And if he outplays Rooney, fine, Rooney can be sent down. $1.125 of his salary can be buried.
It doesn’t have to be Montreal. I’m sure more teams would have been interested in a retained salary deal for Monahan.
Montreal took Monny for one reason only; they got a first round pick out of the deal.
Monny was not a player anyone particularly coveted. He was only movable because a first round pick was attached. Even if the Flames retained 50%, likely no one wanted him because there are better players available on the UFA market at that amount and less.
And a 50% retention would not have allowed the Flames to sign Kadri.
You are undervaluing the cost of cap space these days.
And looking at Monny with old glasses.
I have no doubt that Treliving explored other avenues to clearing cap, such as moving Lucic. We can assume those other deals were not available.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to The Cobra For This Useful Post:
I see mostly stories of teammates liking Kessel. He always seems like a guy that's good for some levity and keeping things light on the team, but also a competitor on the ice. I imagine he's a good guy to have in a room.
It is crazy how he physically looks more like a long haul trucker than an NHL star, but people shouldn't forget the guy's list of accomplishments that don't come without being driven on the ice.
__________________
"If stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out?"
The Following User Says Thank You to JohnnyB For This Useful Post:
Reading what some Rangers fans say about Rooney is that he took a step back last season. He isn't great at face-offs, not really that physical, doesn't forecheck too hard. Sounds more like a 13th forward than a solid fixture on the 4th line every game.
It doesn't sound like they disliked him or scapegoated him, but just that he was pretty forgettable.
Or maybe was in a role that didn't suit him
Sometimes players need a fresh start, different role, different system, different linemates.
Happens all the time, and Gudbranson is the perfect example of how a player finding the right situation can make all the difference
The Following User Says Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
The Avs had Cogliano and Helm on their 4th line. Lightning used Maroon and Bellemare. Every team's 4th line is pretty much grinder/energy guys. These are also the foot soldiers who are more willing to take PK assignments too which is important.
Sutter is all about defining roles for each player and making them feel important, it's probably easier to get more out of your forward group when you're expecting your scorers to score and your checkers to check. Ask everyone to score and you'll start getting players trying to be something that they're not. Rather have guys like Lewis and Rooney on our 4th line than Leivo and Simon who were expected to provide offense - when they didn't produce, they brought nothing to the lineup
Lewis had a nice playoffs. Hope he can bring that again.
Yup, the purpose of the 4th line isn't to generate offence - any players that can generate offense will move up the roster. The reason good teams use grinders like this is that it wears down the other teams' defense - creating more opportunity for your offensive guys to generate said offense.
I know a lot of fans would rather see young guys getting a chance, but there is a reason all good NHL coaches disagree with you.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
Yup, the purpose of the 4th line isn't to generate offence - any players that can generate offense will move up the roster. The reason good teams use grinders like this is that it wears down the other teams' defense - creating more opportunity for your offensive guys to generate said offense.
I know a lot of fans would rather see young guys getting a chance, but there is a reason all good NHL coaches disagree with you.
I disagree. The fourth line has to be able to produce, otherwise it will be a complete liability.
Look at Tampa. They have had guys like Maroon and Perry on their 4th line. They still fill a checking roll, but they are capable of producing. Same goes for Toronto. Simmonds and Aube-Kubel can actually produce.
The NHL still has a lot of parity. The difference between 10 point 4th liners and 25 point 4th liners can't be understated.
Yes, the primary purpose of the fourth line is to wear down opponents. But they have to be able to produce as well. There's a reason that guys like Raitis Ivanans (18 points in 282 games) are always on losing teams.
I disagree. The fourth line has to be able to produce, otherwise it will be a complete liability.
Look at Tampa. They have had guys like Maroon and Perry on their 4th line. They still fill a checking roll, but they are capable of producing. Same goes for Toronto. Simmonds and Aube-Kubel can actually produce.
The NHL still has a lot of parity. The difference between 10 point 4th liners and 25 point 4th liners can't be understated.
Yes, the primary purpose of the fourth line is to wear down opponents. But they have to be able to produce as well. There's a reason that guys like Raitis Ivanans (18 points in 282 games) are always on losing teams.
I am not going to lie, I had never even heard of the guy until the Flames signed him. Rooney mentioned that the Flames tried to sign him a couple of years ago as well, but he chose New York. The Flames obviously see something in him.
I can't speak on him as a player, because like I said, I never heard of him before. I don't follow other teams like I used to back in the day. All I can do is look at it on paper, and Rooney doesn't seem to add anything that wasn't already in the system.
Well Rooney has been a PK fixture on both the Devils and Rangers.
5 of the top 6 PK forwards last season were top six players for the Flames last season. Maybe they want to take some load off of those guys.
Rooney has also outperformed his xga/60 in 3 of the last 4 seasons. Maybe he's got a little Kris Russell in him. Doesn't do well on corsi, but doesn't bleed goals against. Not bleeding goals isn't a bad trait for an end of the roster player.
The primary purpose of a 4th line is to eat up minutes without costing you a game. That's the most important element to a decent 4th line. Keep the puck out of your own zone.
Then you can deviate between two types (with both types being maintaining good defence!):
1) Physical energy line. Just hit everything in sight. The intimidation factor is real. When that 4th line hops over the boards, players are trying to move the puck a bit faster. Just watch how defencemen sometimes end up throwing the puck away when Lucic is coming hard at them.
2) Depth scoring - a good example is when Ryan and Mangiapane were on the 4th line. It worked well because Ryan was a smart player, but that last season it didn't work at all IMO. If you have small guys on that 4th line, they are going to be matched up against guys like Lucic. As soon as that puck ends up along the boards, your smaller players get run over and the puck stays in your zone.
Ideally, you want the best of both worlds - big guys that have depth scoring. If Lucic can find a way to get 10 goals again on the 4th line (rather than from his time on the PP or on the third line, which is how I think most of his goals came last year, no? Maybe I am wrong) that will help. Tim Jackman was an excellent 4th liner type back in the day. Everyone seems to hate him, but even going way back you get a guy like Jason Wiemer on your 4th line. Having 3 guys that can hit, provide depth scoring, but come away without negatives helps your team win games. Nystrom on the 4th line was really good. Stajan became a good 4th liner here.
I thought at times the Lucic - Richardson - Lewis line was solid. The Lucic - Ruzicka - Lewis line was ok. Everything else seemed a bit more mixed to me. I think Lewis is a bit slow to be a center now. I guess that's where Rooney comes in. Hopefully he can really make that 4th line work well.
Lewis was a trusted player in the final minutes of games the Flames were leading. That is telling. If Pelletier is going to make this team, it needs to be in a middle 6 role, not the 4th line.
I don't know Rooney well, but the Flames saw something in him. I wonder if it was one that Sutter also had a hand in in terms of asking his GM to go and get that guy.
The Following User Says Thank You to Jiri Hrdina For This Useful Post:
