[Trade] Hudler traded to Florida for 2016 2nd + 2018 4th round picks

[sun]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

How well did that ignore feature work for you when he proposed we trade our 1st in 2013 for Chris Stewart?

Until there's a feature that cleans up all of the posts that are 'quoting' the guy you've got on ignore, I don't think I'll bother with it.

Dang, that proposal is almost Cammilleri-for-Drouin bad.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by FireGilbert

Also, Cammy was bad asset management and Hudler was great asset management as the Flames were no where near the playoffs and did not need a rental in those cases.

Cammalleri was fine asset management. Sent the message to the player that if you sulk, and mail it in, that you can not expect to be rewarded.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Cammalleri was fine asset management. Sent the message to the player that if you sulk, and mail it in, that you can not expect to be rewarded.

Yep, there's nothing more responsible than showing up a player on your team by not getting an asset for him. Just excellent asset management.

[Jacks]

It also sent a message to other teams that we won't cave to a lowball offer, you want the player make a real offer or no deal. An argument can be made that since then we have gotten better returns for players, feel free to dismiss that as a total coincidence.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Jacks

It also sent a message to other teams that we won't cave to a lowball offer, you want the player make a real offer or no deal. An argument can be made that since then we have gotten better returns for players, feel free to dismiss that as a total coincidence.

That is a big stretch IMO. Cammalleri should have been moved but if the market was that crappy then I guess no big loss. But Brian Burke's trade deadline posturing had no impact on the haul for Russell. Maybe it was a lesson learned that was reflected in the Hudler trade when BT felt the market softening.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

That is a big stretch IMO. Cammalleri should have been moved but if the market was that crappy then I guess no big loss. But Brian Burke's trade deadline posturing had no impact on the haul for Russell. Maybe it was a lesson learned that was reflected in the Hudler trade when BT felt the market softening.

Well none of us know how it impacted future deals. I will say that under Feaster the Flames seemed more ripe for a fleecing than they do under the new regime.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Well none of us know how it impacted future deals. I will say that under Feaster the Flames seemed more ripe for a fleecing than they do under the new regime.

Out of thanks, but this post needs a lot of thanks for being so true.

[albertGQ]

I wonder if it's the same posters applauding Burke for not trading Cammy for just anything are the same posters that said dim Jim should've tried to get anything for Vrbata and Hamhuis

[JiriHrdina]

I can only speak for myself but I haven't said that about Benning

[albertGQ]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

I can only speak for myself but I haven't said that about Benning

Not directing my comment to anyone specifically. Just wondering out loud if anyone's view is different just because of the team involved. Honest question actually.

[Jay Random]

I'm one of those who agree with Burke's rationale in not trading Cammalleri for a lowball offer, and I think Benning should have been able to make a deal for Hamhuis. However, Russell and some other defencemen were dealt at pretty good prices at this year's deadline, which establishes that there was a market for a player like Hamhuis.

If the best offer Benning could get was a fourth-round pick or thereabouts, he would have been justified in turning it down. But I find that hard to believe. From all I've heard, it sounds like he was trying to get a bidding war going, but Dallas dropped out of the bidding and traded for Russell instead; and the deadline expired before Benning could put together a plan B. This makes him look greedy, or inept, or both.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Yep, there's nothing more responsible than showing up a player on your team by not getting an asset for him. Just excellent asset management.

Sorry to find you apparently do not understand it. Appropriate valuation is part of asset management.

And it is sometimes important to send a message to both players and the market that there is a standard for conduct that is acceptable by a given team.

[FireGilbert]

lol at the guy saying Cammy was good asset management. The Flames traded a first rounder for him... then lost him for nothing, then traded a 2nd rounder for him... then lost him for nothing.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by FireGilbert

lol at the guy saying Cammy was good asset management. The Flames traded a first rounder for him... then lost him for nothing, then traded a 2nd rounder for him... then lost him for nothing.

we did get Ramo and Culkin as well the second time. Not quite nothing.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Well none of us know how it impacted future deals. I will say that under Feaster the Flames seemed more ripe for a fleecing than they do under the new regime.

Very true and no one wants a GM who can't make a good trade.

If the choice is getting fleeced (Iginla) vs. getting nothing (Cammy), maybe the best GM's swallow their pride and take what they can get. My gut feel is the Cammy no-trade was more about maintaining a personal reputation than the organization's.

BTW - I get the situations were not the same. And in no way suggesting Feaster made a better GM than Burke. But its a very interesting situation to discuss and speculate upon.

[Jacks]

I negotiate deals with people every day, some people are a soft touch and some people aren't. Even if the price is where I want it I'll still grind the guy (or girl) if I know he'll give in and drop his price. Others I won't even try because I know the answer is no, he might give a bit but not much. Which guy do you think Burke is?

[mikephoen]

I just don't get the people fretting about the Cammy non-trade. It's been mentioned here many times, but at a season ticket holder event before the 2014 season, Burke said that they dropped the asking price to a 2nd but weren't even offered a 3rd for Cammy at the deadline. So the best they were offered was a 4th round pick (or maybe even worse). Would our prospect pool be so much better with Austin Poganski in it? Or Sam Lafferty? Or Danton Heinen?

There isn't much difference between using a 4th to add a prospect vs signing a college free agent or someone like Daniel Pribyl.

They chose to keep Cammy rather than give him away for nothing, and they attempted to resign him. NJ made a much better offer, so he left. It's just not a big deal at all. 4th round pick level assets are so easily picked up that losing one just doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

[JD]

Keep in mind, Cammalleri was pretty good down the stretch that year and probably a big reason the team did well to wrap up the season. That strong finish has been cited often as something that was carried into last season.

So perhaps some of last year's success could be attributed to Burke not fire selling any asset he had. You gotta keep some semblance of a team and keep a winning culture as a priority.