It's time to extend Johnson - Page 4 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

GreenLantern2814 · 01-09-2017, 01:57 PM

2 years/$2.5 per. There's no reason to bid against yourself for Chad. He's dreaming if he thinks any other team is going to give a guy with his resume any more term or dollars. If he'd continued his play from mid November-December and not given the net back to Elliott, I'd say he was setting himself up for a nice 3/$10M deal, but at this point he's making this easy for the Flames.

Johnson is better than Elliott. In the 1A/B role the team is going to want next year, he's fine as long as a kid can pressure him for 40 starts. He's a local kid. The market for goalies is going to be very volatile, and his best chance to play a lot of games at the NHL level is right here.

If he blows it by demanding more money, he's a fool. If Brad goes full Bouma on an extension, he's foolish. Neither side should screw this up.

The Yen Man · 01-09-2017, 02:04 PM

I wouldn't extend him until the the season ended, and we see what options there are for goalies in the offseason. What's the rush? Why potentially handcuff yourself to an extension unnecessarily?

I still think Johnson at best is a tandem goalie, not a starting goalie. So if a tandem is what Calgary is looking for, then I'd like to see who the other goalie they want to target is.

Strange Brew · 01-09-2017, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

I'd be all for extending Johnson right now, as long as it's for a dollar amount that doesn't cement him as our #1. If we can lock him down to a strong back up, or 1B type dollar value I'm there.

Very happy with what he's provided to date, he's clearly our best goalie so far and a big upgrade on last year. However, maybe it's just the stigma, but I'd need to see a lot more before the Flames committed to him in a big way that would force our hand to have him as our #1, I guess I'm not sold yet and would want another option next year for him to compete with (like this year).

There's the rub. If you sign him to 1B money (say $3 million AAV), does that preclude you from getting a true #1?

GreenLantern2814 · 01-09-2017, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

There's the rub. If you sign him to 1B money (say $3 million AAV), does that preclude you from getting a true #1?

If you re-sign Chad, it means one of the kids is playing in the NHL next year.

You can't spend $10M on goalies - if they want to go get Bishop or Fleury, fine. But at that point, you can't bring back Chad and you have to sign a journeyman backup for less than $1.5.

Toonage · 01-09-2017, 02:18 PM

Maybe a guy that has floated around a bit might like term, if the dollar value worked out.

So instead of 3 years at $3m or $3.5m you go 5 years at $2m?

Not saving a bunch but every little but helps. Or is 5 years way too much?

Cleveland Steam Whistle · 01-09-2017, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

There's the rub. If you sign him to 1B money (say $3 million AAV), does that preclude you from getting a true #1?

When BBQing there is alwasy a rub........... or at least there should be. I'd say you are probably correct, likely eliminates the acquiring of a proven entity like Bishop, that's for sure.

GreenLantern2814 · 01-09-2017, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toonage

Maybe a guy that has floated around a bit might like term, if the dollar value worked out.

So instead of 3 years at $3m or $3.5m you go 5 years at $2m?

Not saving a bunch but every little but helps. Or is 5 years way too much?

Waaaaaaay too much. Where's Johnson realistically going to get paid?

The top 10 UFA goalies include Miller, Bishop, Bernier, Mason, Pavelec, Elliott, Chad, Neuvirth, Keumper and Greiss.

Without even factoring in what expansion will do to the market, I don't see anyone on that list who's worth more than 3/$10, at the absolute most (Bishop notwithstanding). I don't think you lose much going from Steve Mason to Chad Johnson, or vice versa. They're all decent to good goalies, who aren't true franchise guys. Those players have a value, but I would be beside myself if we tied ourselves to Chad Johnson (Or any of them) for 5 years.

Strange Brew · 01-09-2017, 04:37 PM

MAF is at $5.75. You could pay him and still have $2M for a backup perhaps. THat would be less than what Treliving paid Hiller and Ramo last year.

MAF and Johnson for two years - you could do worse. I know some people would strongly disagree.

If MAF would come here, I think acquisition cost would be very low.

FireGilbert · 01-09-2017, 05:18 PM

I would love the Flames to extend Johnson to a 3 year deal around $2M per. The best case scenario is he becomes a top 15 goalie playing 60 games while in the worst case he is a solid backup playing 20 games while being a good mentor to a younger goalie like Gillies.

Moneyhands23 · 01-09-2017, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FireGilbert

I would love the Flames to extend Johnson to a 3 year deal around $2M per. The best case scenario is he becomes a top 15 goalie playing 60 games while in the worst case he is a solid backup playing 20 games while being a good mentor to a younger goalie like Gillies.

Id be more interested in a 2.5x2 deal.

GreenLantern2814 · 01-09-2017, 05:43 PM

The extra year is what kills every contract. Bouma for 2 years at $2.2? Fine, whatever. He earned it, dude blocked a lot of shots that year. But for three years? Come on.

Even the Gio deal; 5 years and you're probably like 'great, go Gio!' - but add on that sixth and there's this stabbing pain your your side telling you 'yeah this is gonna hurt eventually'.

Any of these middling players can stick around for 2 years. They want anything more, remind them they can be replaced with people on one year deals who are better. And then reduce your offer $500k just to show you're not messing around.

FireGilbert · 01-09-2017, 05:48 PM

Also, I'm not 100% sure of the expansion rules, but I assume the Flames would wait until after the season to sign Johnson or else he would need to be protected in the draft?

FlamesFan68 · 01-09-2017, 07:33 PM

Extend, but very short term with so many goalie prospects coming up through the system. I still haven't seen a #1 goalie in him, but he may yet surprise. He's definitely earned backup status on any team of mine.

calf · 01-09-2017, 08:22 PM

I think Treliving's focus shouldn't be on Johnson, but getting a bigger D

btimbit · 01-09-2017, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by calf

I think Treliving's focus shouldn't be on Johnson, but getting a bigger D

I think we have a winner

Textcritic · 01-09-2017, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FireGilbert

Also, I'm not 100% sure of the expansion rules, but I assume the Flames would wait until after the season to sign Johnson or else he would need to be protected in the draft?

It doesn't matter one way or the other since Johnson would then be the only goalie requiring protection. (Of course this is barring them acquiring a starter for next season.)

Machiavelli · 01-09-2017, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by calf

I think Treliving's focus shouldn't be on Johnson, but getting a bigger D

Bigger, or better?

calf · 01-09-2017, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Machiavelli

Bigger, or better?

D = Big
Big = Good

...or so I am told.

btimbit · 01-09-2017, 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by calf

D = Big
Big = Good

...or so I am told.

If the internet has taught me anything....

dissentowner · 01-10-2017, 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

MAF is at $5.75. You could pay him and still have $2M for a backup perhaps. THat would be less than what Treliving paid Hiller and Ramo last year.

MAF and Johnson for two years - you could do worse. I know some people would strongly disagree.

If MAF would come here, I think acquisition cost would be very low.

I strongly disagree, MAF is terrible and that is behind the SC champs. That would be a nightmare.