Buyout Window - Page 4 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Bingo · 07-31-2019, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I agree.

A guy on the bubble couldn't get back in after being away from the ice for 40 games.

But he had already essentially lost his job to Valimaki by November. If he had the same contract as Prout, does he even make it to November ahead of Valimaki? I don't think so.

Flames rookies were pushing and he was the first casualty.

The situation hasn't exactly improved for Stone either.

Buyout seems more or less inevitable.

Can't disagree.

I think as an overpaid 7 without the blood clot his contract wouldn't be negative value though, which is irrelevant because he did have the blood clot and they are where they are.

ricardodw · 07-31-2019, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

And then Fantenberg got ice over Stone and Prout.

And then Valimaki got ice over Fantenberg, Stone and Prout.

Okay so at the end of last season Stone was the Flames #9 D-man.... but you have to admit he was one of the best #9s in the league and he is basically a #4 on most teams.

TheScorpion · 07-31-2019, 01:48 PM

Once again Stone didn't lose his spot to Valimaki. Kulak was dealt to make room for Valimaki. They both shoot left. Stone shoots right and was the de facto 3 RD before Andersson came along.

Semantics, but it's still a repeated falsehood. And once again, both Stone and Kulak are still good NHL defenders despite being usurped. It would be just fine if Stone was put back into the lineup on a consistent basis if Brodie was dealt.

Jiggy · 07-31-2019, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Okay so at the end of last season Stone was the Flames #9 D-man.... but you have to admit he was one of the best #9s in the league and he is basically a #4 on most teams.

Stone had a health issue and couldn't crack the top 6 when the team was rolling. Doesn't mean he's a terrible defenseman that won't be able to be a #5 or 6 on this team, and possibly step up to a top 4 role if the Flames have injuries.

Strange Brew · 07-31-2019, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bingo

Can't disagree.

I think as an overpaid 7 without the blood clot his contract wouldn't be negative value though, which is irrelevant because he did have the blood clot and they are where they are.

$3.5 million as #7 does scream negative value to me. It’s pretty obvious this offseason how valuable cap space is and I don’t see any team overpaying by that much for roster depth. If you overpay by $2 or $2.5 million do it on your top line IMO.

The blood clot shouldn’t really affect his value to the Flames much IMO, and will be telling if he gets bought out.

TheScorpion · 07-31-2019, 01:57 PM

Has there been any indication that the Flames did not submit the contract on the day it was announced? Because otherwise, the buyout window has come and gone. We would have heard something this morning, that's when waivers are always posted.

timbit · 07-31-2019, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Okay so at the end of last season Stone was the Flames #9 D-man.... but you have to admit he was one of the best #9s in the league and he is basically a #4 on most teams.

Following your “logic”, at the end of last season Connor McDavid and Taylor Hall were #15 forwards and Erik Karlsson was a #9 D.

Flash Walken · 07-31-2019, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bingo

Can't disagree.

I think as an overpaid 7 without the blood clot his contract wouldn't be negative value though, which is irrelevant because he did have the blood clot and they are where they are.

a 3.5 million dollar #7 defender has negative value on 31 teams in the NHL.

Who are stone's comparables in that regard? Kris Russell and Jack Johnson? Thomas Hickey, maybe?

Do you think any of those guys have positive trade value?

Truly, the blood clot is unfortunate and I hope it's not an issue for him going forward, but wasn't stone essentially the James Neal of defenders in that everyone that played with him was worse than they were without him?

If the Flames buyout Stone, is Treliving just an idiot who didn't trade a player who had value, or does that pretty much establish his value was so negative that it made more sense to buyout another player in consecutive years?

TheScorpion · 07-31-2019, 02:07 PM

I wouldn't take a 14-game sample as anything resembling definitive, particularly given the nature of his injury. Stone was perfectly fine in 2017-18.

GioforPM · 07-31-2019, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

I wouldn't take a 14-game sample as anything resembling definitive, particularly given the nature of his injury. Stone was perfectly fine in 2017-18.

14 games, especially ones with some rust in them, can't carry any statistical import.

On the other hand, the fact he could only manage 14 games, even if because of injury, would make me leery of getting him without at least a look at his present game.

Bingo · 07-31-2019, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

a 3.5 million dollar #7 defender has negative value on 31 teams in the NHL.

Who are stone's comparables in that regard? Kris Russell and Jack Johnson? Thomas Hickey, maybe?

Do you think any of those guys have positive trade value?

Truly, the blood clot is unfortunate and I hope it's not an issue for him going forward, but wasn't stone essentially the James Neal of defenders in that everyone that played with him was worse than they were without him?

If the Flames buyout Stone, is Treliving just an idiot who didn't trade a player who had value, or does that pretty much establish his value was so negative that it made more sense to buyout another player in consecutive years?

Well #7 on one of the top 5? 3? 8? defense corps in the league isn't a league wide #7 but point taken.

But surely a Stone that was in and out of the lineup all season after getting beat out could get moved for a 6th with $1M retained.

All academic now anyway.

Flash Walken · 07-31-2019, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bingo

Well #7 on one of the top 5? 3? 8? defense corps in the league isn't a league wide #7 but point taken.

But surely a Stone that was in and out of the lineup all season after getting beat out could get moved for a 6th with $1M retained.

All academic now anyway.

look at Trevor Daley.

Last year of his deal making 3.1, modified NTC.

Even on an absolutely terrible Detroit defense, last year he was #7, within nipping distance of two guys 23 and 20 years of age (sound familiar).

Detroit is one of the worst teams in the league and they wouldn't do a straight swap of stone for daley.

Stone is on Kris Russell levels of being an NHL player unfortunately. That's a tough friggin market to crack.

Bingo · 07-31-2019, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

look at Trevor Daley.

Last year of his deal making 3.1, modified NTC.

Even on an absolutely terrible Detroit defense, last year he was #7, within nipping distance of two guys 23 and 20 years of age (sound familiar).

Detroit is one of the worst teams in the league and they wouldn't do a straight swap of stone for daley.

Stone is on Kris Russell levels of being an NHL player unfortunately. That's a tough friggin market to crack.

Right ...

But I haven't said differently. I said in a world without the blood clot he wouldn't be negative value with salary retained.

midniteowl · 07-31-2019, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikeecho

It diminishes the value of the ingore function when people keep quoting certain posters

Agree, I was hoping there is a function that once you put a poster on ignore, his post would not appear even someone quoting him.

Reggie Dunlop · 07-31-2019, 05:29 PM

So, no other buy-outs today (other than Shattenkirk)?

Poe969 · 07-31-2019, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

So, no other buy-outs today (other than Shattenkirk)?

THIS JUST IN.....no.

The Original FFIV · 07-31-2019, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

So, no other buy-outs today (other than Shattenkirk)?

Lots of discussion on Twitter on the timing

Apparently it opens 3 biz days after buyout. So it’s either 5pm est today or 1201am est tomorrow

TheScorpion · 07-31-2019, 06:14 PM

edit: see below

TheScorpion · 07-31-2019, 06:37 PM

apparently according to Pike and Brooks the buyout window actually opens tonight, because of... business days, which seemingly directly contradicts what I read in the CBA today...

I'm so confused by all of this. I'd understand if the Flames filed the contract later or something, but... how bizarre

chubeyr1 · 07-31-2019, 06:56 PM

The buyout window is closing shortly.

Buying out Stone still won’t allow us to resign Tkachuk. Not at the value most people think he is worth at least. A bridge contract would be amazing,
young guys don’t seem to be signing those though.

What about buying out Frolik? Yes absolutely trade him if you can. A buyout on Frolik would give us the cap space to sign Tkachuk. We may need to limit our roster by a player to make it work. Yet we would be cap compliant.

I am not saying this is what we should do. Just have not heard it discussed here.

I like Frolik, buying him out is really not an option we should be looking at. He is a decent player that is not overpaid, and if so not by much. Yet solves our cap issues.

I never caused this cap issue so bare with me. Buying out Frolik makes us cap compliant. Yet I sure hope there is trade out their instead of this.

I like Stone, Frolik, and Brodie. Yet the team needs to be cap compliant.

What I suggest I think works. I don’t like it, but it does work.

Something needs to happen in the next 48 hours or so. Or we lose all leverage in a trade.

Will be interesting to watch.