Offseason - strategy of exploiting teams in cap trouble

[Alberta_Beef]

I would be cautious in trying to capitalize on having more cap space than other clubs, unfortunately none of the guys available will not be key players for much longer when our rebuild is complete. For now I would look at bringing in guys that are chalk full of character and leadership as well as players that are known to be good teachers in hopes it really helps the youngsters.

I would target 1 of 2 former Flame defensemen to be honest. Roman Hamrlik or Andrew Ference. I know both are "post apex" players and neither will contribute a ton on the ice, but I think both would contribute significantly to the development of our young defensemen.

Hamrlik proved himself to be a good teacher when he was here in the past and I think he would be a good player to work with Brodie and Butler especially. Ference I think is just a good guy to have around the team, he plays the game hard, is a great teammate and those are very good things to have around young players of all positions.

I'm not sure of the logistics since we should have 6 returning defensemen (Giordano, Wideman, Brodie, Butler, Sarich & Smith) and 2 newcomers knocking on the door (Breen & Cundari), but I would think someone would have to go (Smith could be dumped in the minors and would probably clear waivers at the end of camp IMO). I think there is also a possibility of Sarich retiring, but I think he fits in with Hamrlik & Ference as a great guy to have around young players and will bring more in what he teaches than he does on the ice (he has worked with Giordano & Brodie in recent years).

For forwards I would look for toughness & leadership, even if it is just in the bottom 6. I would definitely want players that exude the same qualities I want in a defenseman. But since I believe we should bring Cervenka back I think another forward needs to go (either Cammy, Tangs or both).

In either position (forward or defense) we may be able to find a player with a bad contract that a team might let go for cheap that while they may not be what they once were they could be an asset to our young talent.

[kermitology]

The biggest problem with offer sheets is that you still have to get the player to sign them.

That being said, I would easily give up the required picks for Pietrangelo or Berglund. Pietrangelo will be matched no matter what, but Berglund might not be.

[Poe969]

The reason I don't like offer sheets is that we'd have to give up picks, and this team doesn't have enough prospects to give up potentially high draft picks. If we give away our first rounder next year, it's a mistake.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by blankall

Disagree.

2nd and 3rd round picks (even high ones) have a very slim chance of success.

That may be the case. However, a lot of quality NHLers, including stars, come from 2nd and 3rd round picks. Just look at the Bruins. Bergeron - one of two 2nd round picks; Krejci - one of two 2nd round picks; Lucic - one of two 2nd round picks; Marchand - 3rd round pick. The lesson isn't that 2nd and 3rd round picks are useless; the lesson is the draft is a lottery, and you need lots of tickets to hit the jackpot.

Sure, you can get a more established young player with an RFA in the 2nd round pick range. But I guarantee he won't be a star. Teams simply don't let those guys go. We should be swinging for the fences. That includes acquiring lots of 2nd and 3rd round picks and hope with hit the jackpot with a couple of them.

[Enoch Root]

The last thing I want to see them do in the middle of a rebuild is to spend their draft picks on offer sheets

[blankall]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

That may be the case. However, a lot of quality NHLers, including stars, come from 2nd and 3rd round picks. Just look at the Bruins. Bergeron - one of two 2nd round picks; Krejci - one of two 2nd round picks; Lucic - one of two 2nd round picks; Marchand - 3rd round pick. The lesson isn't that 2nd and 3rd round picks are useless; the lesson is the draft is a lottery, and you need lots of tickets to hit the jackpot.

Sure, you can get a more established young player with an RFA in the 2nd round pick range. But I guarantee he won't be a star. Teams simply don't let those guys go. We should be swinging for the fences. That includes acquiring lots of 2nd and 3rd round picks and hope with hit the jackpot with a couple of them.

So you're saying we should pass at the opportunity to have an already established player to take the lottery chance of having a really good player? I could make the same argument about guys that we are likely to offer sheet. A 21 year old 2nd pairing d-man, could develop into a top pairing d-man. A 21 year old forward with 50 points, could develop into a 70 point guy. If anything, the odds of a 21 year old with significant accomplishments, developing into a star far exceed those of picking a star in the 2nd or 3rd round.

I don't doubt that some teams get luck in the 2nd and 3rd round. That doesn't change the fact that most of these picks end up not even as NHLers, let alone impact players.

I'm not saying that we definitely should offer sheet, but if the opportunity comes along, it's something we should go for. The Flames need to start having better asset managment as a whole. That includes trade, drafting, offer sheets, etc... We shouldn't totally abandon a method of acquiring quality players. The Flames need to stay open to all opportunities as they present themselves. With the cap falling this year, it presents a great opportunity to take advantage.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by blankall

So you're saying we should pass at the opportunity to have an already established player to take the lottery chance of having a really good player? I could make the same argument about guys that we are likely to offer sheet. A 21 year old 2nd pairing d-man, could develop into a top pairing d-man. A 21 year old forward with 50 points, could develop into a 70 point guy. If anything, the odds of a 21 year old with significant accomplishments, developing into a star far exceed those of picking a star in the 2nd or 3rd round.

The teams that drafted and developed those 21-year-olds are going to have a good read on whether they're likely to make that jump. And they simply aren't going to give up on the guys they think will develop into a top-pairing d-man or 70 point guy.

So that strategy would be a good way to fill out the roster with NHL players. But it's not going to help you hit a home run and bring in a guy who can be part of the core of an elite team.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by blankall

So you're saying we should pass at the opportunity to have an already established player to take the lottery chance of having a really good player? I could make the same argument about guys that we are likely to offer sheet. A 21 year old 2nd pairing d-man, could develop into a top pairing d-man. A 21 year old forward with 50 points, could develop into a 70 point guy. If anything, the odds of a 21 year old with significant accomplishments, developing into a star far exceed those of picking a star in the 2nd or 3rd round.

I don't doubt that some teams get luck in the 2nd and 3rd round. That doesn't change the fact that most of these picks end up not even as NHLers, let alone impact players.

I'm not saying that we definitely should offer sheet, but if the opportunity comes along, it's something we should go for. The Flames need to start having better asset managment as a whole. That includes trade, drafting, offer sheets, etc... We shouldn't totally abandon a method of acquiring quality players. The Flames need to stay open to all opportunities as they present themselves. With the cap falling this year, it presents a great opportunity to take advantage.

I'm so sick of opinions like these. It's like people are deliberately not trying to learn the lessons of history. That or that people are fine with a team that's competitive and not a contender. To that I question whether those are "real fans."

[blankall]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The teams that drafted and developed those 21-year-olds are going to have a good read on whether they're likely to make that jump. And they simply aren't going to give up on the guys they think will develop into a top-pairing d-man or 70 point guy.

So that strategy would be a good way to fill out the roster with NHL players. But it's not going to help you hit a home run and bring in a guy who can be part of the core of an elite team.

Originally Posted by Tinordi

I'm so sick of opinions like these. It's like people are deliberately not trying to learn the lessons of history. That or that people are fine with a team that's competitive and not a contender. To that I question whether those are "real fans."

How is giving up a 2nd or 3rd round for a promissing 21 year old with NHL experience, not make us a contender?

There are plenty of players who develop into far more than they are at 21. In fact, you're much more likely to hit a "home run" getting an established 21 year old than just some random 2nd/3rd round pick.

I guess I'm not a real fan, because I want to exchange a 3rd round pick for a 21 year old who is already proven and may develop into something far more? What possible kind of sense does that make.

I'll say it again...only on the internet is acquiring a 21 year old considered throwing away the future. Are you guys honestly telling me that if you could acquire a player like Backlund for a 2nd or 3rd round pick you wouldn't do it? Let's be honest here too, the odds of acquiring a better player than Backlund in the 2nd or 3rd round are what? 1/30, so 3%?

[Tinordi]

How is giving up a 2nd or 3rd round for a promissing 21 year old with NHL experience, not make us a contender?

Which player are you talking about specifically? Who is promising that's in the spectre of possibility for a team to not match an offer sheet? The history of offer sheets suggests that they are not useful tools to acquire players. Please demonstrate otherwise.

There are plenty of players who develop into far more than they are at 21. In fact, you're much more likely to hit a "home run" getting an established 21 year old than just some random 2nd/3rd round pick.

Again this all depends on you successfully being able to acquire the player, which is very very faint.

I guess I'm not a real fan, because I want to exchange a 3rd round pick for a 21 year old who is already proven and may develop into something far more? What possible kind of sense does that make.

Who is the mystery player that you speak of?

I'll say it again...only on the internet is acquiring a 21 year old considered throwing away the future. Are you guys honestly telling me that if you could acquire a player like Backlund for a 2nd or 3rd round pick you wouldn't do it? Let's be honest here too, the odds of acquiring a better player than Backlund in the 2nd or 3rd round are what? 1/30, so 3%?

The only way to build a contending team is through the draft. You need to swallow this down. The window is 4 years away. That's how long it will take. Any bit of Berglund or Tanev that we acquire with our picks is only shuffling deck chairs around. Berglund and Tanev are not the players that you build an elite core out of. Those players, while theoretically accessible with offer sheets merely muddle you along further the path of mediocrity.

This jackboot cavalier attitude to developing the future and instead wanting to take the shortcut is the REASON we are in this predicament. Now you want to double down on this failed strategy. Open your friggin eyes.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by blankall

How is giving up a 2nd or 3rd round for a promissing 21 year old with NHL experience, not make us a contender?

There are plenty of players who develop into far more than they are at 21. In fact, you're much more likely to hit a "home run" getting an established 21 year old than just some random 2nd/3rd round pick.

I guess I'm not a real fan, because I want to exchange a 3rd round pick for a 21 year old who is already proven and may develop into something far more? What possible kind of sense does that make.

I'll say it again...only on the internet is acquiring a 21 year old considered throwing away the future. Are you guys honestly telling me that if you could acquire a player like Backlund for a 2nd or 3rd round pick you wouldn't do it? Let's be honest here too, the odds of acquiring a better player than Backlund in the 2nd or 3rd round are what? 1/30, so 3%?

Yeah, I think most people would be ok with shipping out 2nd/3rds for young NHLers with upside potential, or at least should be ok with it. That's a lot different than adding veteran depth grit players for a playoff push, imo.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

Yeah, I think most people would be ok with shipping out 2nd/3rds for young NHLers with upside potential, or at least should be ok with it. That's a lot different than adding veteran depth grit players for a playoff push, imo.

If the target player only returns a second or third as compensation that means they aren't in line for a huge salary. If they have enough potential to benefit the Flames why doesn't their current team just resign them for that reasonable price? I think offer sheets only really work if there is financial leverage of a big contract offer, in which case the acquiring team is looking at a 1st plus as compensation (see O'Reilly, Ryan).

The notion that you can get a promising young player for a cheap compensation pick is a pipe dream.

[Sylvanfan]

It comes down to where the on ice team is at this point in time. Where the Flames are right now, I would have to say I side with those who suggest the team should try and make deals like San Jose just made where Doug Murray goes for 2-2nd round picks type of thing. It's nice to have multiple first round picks...but I think you do have to consider the option of trading away lesser parts and seing if you can't get multiple picks in rounds 2 and 3. Nashville didn't pick Shea Weber in the 2003 draft with their own original pick...he was the third pick they had in that round after they had strategically decided to stock up on picks in that draft.

Now if there is a team out there in cap trouble who will part with a 2nd or 3rd round pick if you will assume one of their liability contracts, by all means I think it's worth pursuing. But which teams will that be? The likes of New York Rangers, Philly, Toronto will surely go to the compliance buyout before they consider this type of option.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

I'm not sure of the logistics since we should have 6 returning defensemen (Giordano, Wideman, Brodie, Butler, Sarich & Smith) and 2 newcomers knocking on the door (Breen & Cundari), but I would think someone would have to go (Smith could be dumped in the minors and would probably clear waivers at the end of camp IMO).

I actually was thinking that Ference would be great here next year too.

But there is not problem with the Flames having space to add D-men. Our D was not vary good this year and we took away our top player. Also Sarich is getting old and has struggled to play a full season for years now.


I think if you look at where guys could slot in on a good team

1st Pair Giordano
2nd Pair Wideman, Brodie
3rd Pair Butler
Reserve Smith, Sarich
Competing for a Call-up Cundari, Breen, Lamb, Witherspoon, Ramage.

Just as an example,

If we could add Shattenkirk and Ference and loss nobody, I think we would have an above average group on paper, with good depth in case of injuries.

If we add nobody and use Condari and Breen full time, we probably have 28th - 30th best D on paper, with unexperianced depth in case of injuries.

Giordano-Wideman
Brodie-Butler
Smith-Condari
Sarich-Breen
(That's almost Edmonton cerica 2010 bad).

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by blankall

I'll say it again...only on the internet is acquiring a 21 year old considered throwing away the future. Are you guys honestly telling me that if you could acquire a player like Backlund for a 2nd or 3rd round pick you wouldn't do it? Let's be honest here too, the odds of acquiring a better player than Backlund in the 2nd or 3rd round are what? 1/30, so 3%?

I'll take an actual good young player over the miniscule chance you may get a better one every time, since there is a far greater chance you don't get a player at all.

The flames got in trouble trading picks for aging players far too often. But the right course is balance, not swinging absurdly the other direction.

I'd be surprised if the flames don't pick up some actual players in the summer. Whether that's through offer sheet, trading picks, or free agents who knows.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by edslunch

If the target player only returns a second or third as compensation that means they aren't in line for a huge salary. If they have enough potential to benefit the Flames why doesn't their current team just resign them for that reasonable price? I think offer sheets only really work if there is financial leverage of a big contract offer, in which case the acquiring team is looking at a 1st plus as compensation (see O'Reilly, Ryan).

The notion that you can get a promising young player for a cheap compensation pick is a pipe dream.

Disagree. There are several teams who cannot afford to pay their RFAs 3.4 or 2.5 million dollars. I'd take a look at: Tanev, Kruger, Shroeder, Leddy, Barberio, Aulie, JT Brown, Spruggen, etc...

A lot of these players would be great value for a 3rd and some for a 2nd.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by blankall

Disagree. There are several teams who cannot afford to pay their RFAs 3.4 or 2.5 million dollars. I'd take a look at: Tanev, Kruger, Shroeder, Leddy, Barberio, Aulie, JT Brown, Spruggen, etc...

A lot of these players would be great value for a 3rd and some for a 2nd.

So what are Brodie or Baertschi's asking prices going to be if you're paying guys like Tanev and Schroeder $3M a year?

[blankall]

Originally Posted by opendoor

So what are Brodie or Baertschi's asking prices going to be if you're paying guys like Tanev and Schroeder $3M a year?

Apples and oranges. The Flames can afford to match whatever offer sheets are presented to them. Also, never said I'd pay Schroeder 3 mil. We're overpaying, in dollars, to acquire these guys at a discount, in assets. I don't know how that affects the price of our own RFAs. It no more affects the price of our own RFAs than picking up a UFA.

Listen, I'm not saying that an offer sheet is a certainty, but it's definitely something we should look at. It makes no sense to never look at offer sheets because trading picks for players didn't work out in the past. We aren't talking about acquiring 30+ year old vets. We're talking about players in their very early 20s.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by edslunch

If the target player only returns a second or third as compensation that means they aren't in line for a huge salary. If they have enough potential to benefit the Flames why doesn't their current team just resign them for that reasonable price? I think offer sheets only really work if there is financial leverage of a big contract offer, in which case the acquiring team is looking at a 1st plus as compensation (see O'Reilly, Ryan).

The notion that you can get a promising young player for a cheap compensation pick is a pipe dream.

The difference between this year and other year's is teams that would normally match a 3 million offer to a 2 million value RFA might not be able to due to the lower cap.

[Husky]

Unless its a top not RFAs, the Flames should be focused on developing their own young players and using picks to improve their own drafting.