[News] Dennis Wideman healthy scratch for tonight's game against EDM

[Flash Walken]

“I just tried to look into it for a bit because when I first heard he wasn’t playing, I assumed it was because he got banged up on the hit by Burrows, and Bob Hartley made it very clear that was not the case. It was a healthy scratch.

“I guess they’ve been a bit like oil and water, Wideman and Hartley. They’ve had trouble getting on the same page. The one thing that you have to do though, when you are a coach of a young team - and regardless of Hartley’s future, whether he’s going to be the long-term coach or not of the Flames, while he’s in charge of a team like this, the one thing that the organization says is – you’ve got to teach our young guys that they have to do it right. And if the coach feels strongly that for whatever reason Wideman isn’t doing what he asks, you have to send a message up and down the lineup. Especially with kids. And that’s obviously what he’s doing.

“Now, we had talked earlier guys, about the fact that I had heard Wideman’s name out there, and that was denied. And he does have full control over his situation. But you always wonder if around part of all of it is that maybe the coach is trying to say to the player, ‘Hey, if you’re not going to buy in to what I want you to do, maybe you should see if there is someplace else that you might want to go.’

“So we’ll see where this plays out. But at the very least, it just shows that I don’t think this particular coach and this particular player have seen eye-to-eye in quite some time.”

On what the league temperature or appetite would be for a Dennis Wideman:

"I think now it's kind of tough. At this point in the season it can be kind of difficult to move players with higher salaries because everybody is so tight to the cap or to their budget.

"The one thing I do believe, very strongly, is that you can always use defencemen. And if there's one position during the season where there tends to be a lot of attrition, it's on the blueline.

"He's a guy who can play, he's a guy who can get some points. I think it always comes down to a) What would a deal mean for Calgary, would they take a bit of money. Would they do stuff like that. I think it all comes down to the structure. But again, the one thing I do believe Dean, is people are always interested in defencemen. I think the only thing that would scare anybody away with Wideman in particular would be the term."

http://www.nicholsonhockey.com/worth...-oil-and-water

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Stay Golden

Scratching Wideman ok you would be hard pressed to find a Flames fan to disagree with that. Scratching Grats against the chippy Oilers in their barn I don't get.

I was thinking the same thing, but Big 'Ern is a nuclear deterrent, and there are times when that deterrent isnt needed and you can get more for the team out of a different skater getting those minutes.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by mrdonkey

I still can't believe Feaster thought spending nearly $12 million on Wideman, Jones, and SOB was an ok thing to do.

The Wideman deal he owns.... he dumped Tanguay's 3.5M for 3 year and Sarich's 2M for a year

to take on Jones 4M for 3 years. net impact the Flames paid 1.5M more for Jones and SOB than Tanquay and Sarich.

Tanguay would have been bought out if they were unable to trade him.... Jones still has a chance to contribute.

[ricardodw]

This healthy benching of Wideman puts him clearly on the market. Chances are we trade him for someone else's bad contact/problem child that just might fit in here.

[Locke]

I dont see this as a clear indication that the gauntlet has been thrown down that Wideman is personae non-gratae.

He wasnt good in game 1, but it was only game 1. He has a very successful NHL track record.

At the same time, Wideman is not crucial to the Flames' success at the moment.

Someone would need to offer something pretty decent if they want him. The Flames would almost certainly eat half his salary, but I dont see it as though the Flames actively want to get rid of him.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

The Wideman deal he owns.... he dumped Tanguay's 3.5M for 3 year and Sarich's 2M for a year

to take on Jones 4M for 3 years. net impact the Flames paid 1.5M more for Jones and SOB than Tanquay and Sarich.

Tanguay would have been bought out if they were unable to trade him.... Jones still has a chance to contribute.

Well Feaster also signed Tanguay and Sarich to those contracts 1 year before the deals.... the trade was one mess to fix his old mess.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

This healthy benching of Wideman puts him clearly on the market. Chances are we trade him for someone else's bad contact/problem child that just might fit in here.

I think that it's being read into too much. He had a bad camp and a bad game, and now he's scratched. I'm sure Hartley will listen to any offer but I doubt there's more to it than the fact that he's been bad and looks lazy.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by heep223

I'm sure Hartley will listen to any offer

For months, various people on CP have been talking as if Burke made all the personnel decisions. Now it looks like Hartley's turn.

What is Treliving, the Invisible Man?

[Vinny01]

Retain a good chunk of the salary and Wideman has decent value. If the flames are 50% of the hit he is making $2.625M for 3 years which is good for a 3rd pairing D with 0.5ppg and is a coveted right hand shot.

[Torrie the Whaler]

A power play quarterback, puck moving defenceman is always a wanted piece. Any playoff team will pay handsomely for the chance to have him. He is also very difficult to replace. Be careful what you wish for.

[Iggy3x]

Originally Posted by Machiavelli

That is such a strange, childish tweet. Is that actually a verified account?

I just thought the same thing.

Edit: looks like it is him. Weird tweet. WTF? Don't think we can trade Wideman. Just hope he doesn't distract the room and becomes a bad example for the young guys.

[saillias]

What kind of professional goes on twitter and makes these sassy, smack talk comments about their former employer. Not even that, but it made NO sense whatsoever. It reads like a 17 year olds facebook post. This just makes me all the more relieved they canned him.

[powderjunkie]

Maybe I'm just blind, but can someone provide the tweets being discussed?

[Max Cow Disease]

As lame as that tweet is, some of the responses on twitter are doubly lame. I mean, we get it, the dude's rather rotund...

Also, silly question, but when a team retains salary in a trade, do they actually pay the retained portion of the salary, or does it strictly go on the books for cap purposes?

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Max Cow Disease

Also, silly question, but when a team retains salary in a trade, do they actually pay the retained portion of the salary, or does it strictly go on the books for cap purposes?

They pay. You retain a fixed percentage of both the salary and cap hit.

So, if you have a guy with two years remaining on a contract with a cap hit of $4M and an actual salary of $5M and $6M in those two years, and you retain 50% of his contract, the retaining team will pay him $2.5M and $3M in the final two seasons, and they'll carry a cap hit of $2M for those seasons.

[Jay Random]

Not a silly queston at all. The answer is in CBA section 50.5 (e) (iii) (B):

Any and all Player Salary and Bonuses in a Retained Salary Transaction (i.e., the actual amounts paid to a Player in the remaining years of the SPC) shall be allocated between the two Clubs participating in the Retained Salary Transaction on the same percentage basis as the allocation of the Averaged Amount and such percentage cannot be altered from year to year. The Player shall be paid by the Club for whom he is playing (or most recently played for) when such payment is due.
Illustration: Club A agrees to Trade a Player to Club B and agrees to retain thirty (30) percent of that SPC's Averaged Amount (i.e., Club A's Averaged Club Salary in each of the remaining years under that SPC shall include 30% of the Player's Averaged Amount in each of the remaining years under that SPC). Club A shall also be responsible for reimbursing Club B for thirty (30) percent of the Player's Player Salary and Bonuses in each of the remaining years under that SPC.

So the team that retained salary sends the money to the player's current team, and that team then pays it to the player.

[The Original FFIV]

Originally Posted by Torrie the Whaler

A power play quarterback, puck moving defenceman is always a wanted piece. Any playoff team will pay handsomely for the chance to have him. He is also very difficult to replace. Be careful what you wish for.

Only problem with the above is that playoff teams will be pushed to the cap limit and won't be able to take on his cap hit, even at half price.

As for the comment about taking on another teams bad contract or problem child, here are some names I thought of

Luke Schenn. We've talked about him before but he may need to leave Philly sooner rather than later. -6 to start the season after two games and the fans apparently hate him and there were comments last year about those in the flyers organization who wondered if he was a NHL defenseman anymore. Believe he needs to leave Philly in order to regain his confidence. Would Hextall want Wideman and would Wideman waive for Philly? Perhaps.

Marc Methot. Ottawa is at an impasse with him on a contract extension and if he won't sign extension, he will be moved. Ottawa offered 4.6m aav which is .625 less than what wideman is making. Can we eat the difference and acquire a shutdown defenceman coming off an off year with back issues? Probably. Would Murray be interested in Wideman? Could see it, but would Wideman waive to go to a bubble team in the east? Maybe if he continues to sit in the press box here.

Ryan Wilson. 6-7 guy on the bubble in Colorado. Wideman would be an upgrade here but we would need to eat half the salary to make it work. UFa at seasons end and imagine Treliving would want something else back future wise (prospect and/or pick) if we are retaining that much salary. Defence is Colorados Achilles heel, but how much, if anything is Sakic prepared to offer in order to address it?

Thought Dallas might be interested in the off season but they appear willing to go with their kids for now. Can't see them offering up their youngsters for Wideman at this point.

[Enoch Root]

It would be tough to move Wideman right now, simply due to the fact that it is too early in the season for the cap.

The cap is calculated daily. If you get too close to the cap at the beginning of the season, you don't leave yourself any wiggle room.

However, as the season goes on, things get a little better. Each day, you bank the amount that you were under the cap and accumulate the savings. For example, if you were $1m under the cap, you would accumulate 1,000,000 / 186 = $5,376.34 of room.

Not very much. But you get another $5,376 tomorrow. And the next day.

So with each passing day, your situation softens. At the same time, the remaining number of days in the season is decreasing, which means picking up a player becomes less and less of a burden with each day.

Sorry, not very articulate description.

tl;dr

Too early in the season to trade Wideman

[calumniate]

So that must mean we're going for it this year! :-D

[The Original FFIV]

Per Sportaks Twitter no one has talked to Wideman about the scratch. Bad on Hartley if so and bad on Wideman to say this in the press. Treliving needs to step in here before it gets ugly. Headed for a divorce I think.