[Rumour] Giordano Extension. Kypreos: Starting point is $72 million over 8 years

[Hugh Jahrmes]

Honest question:

Is missing the playoffs an absolute failure for next year?

We expected to be bottom 3 bad last year.

Some basic progression would have us in the middle of the team's missing the dance this year.. Do we make / not make moves that have negative long term outcome to try to do it this year?

[DJones]

Originally Posted by Hugh Jahrmes

Honest question:

Is missing the playoffs an absolute failure for next year?

We expected to be bottom 3 bad last year.

Some basic progression would have us in the middle of the team's missing the dance this year.. Do we make / not make moves that have negative long term outcome to try to do it this year?

Obviously we'd be disappointed but as long as we're competitive I'll be happy if we are a bubble team. Players are still developing so by no means should we enter win now mode.

Whatever helps us be a contender in 2-5 years from now.

[bax]

Originally Posted by DJones

I am going off the fact that for the last twenty games plus playoffs they looked like a playoff team without Gio.



Hamilton and Fransen easily cover Widemans loss in my opinion. Maybe not this year but in two years I have faith that some of our defensive prospects can be at least solid 3 pairings. Even being pessimistic that seems reasonable.



How good this team could be is completely dependent on development so who knows but in no way is it a lottery team. Unless lottery team means anyway that misses the playoffs.

For 20 games they did look good yes, but you can't count on Wideman, Gaudreau, Monahan, and Hudler all playing at a point per game pace over a full season. Especially Wideman (or his replacement in Franson who is a downgrade imo)

It also wasn't an ideal situation basically only using 4 defenseman. Over the short term that can work, but over a full season fatigue and injuries will catch up to you. The team listed lacks depth on the blue line.

I think you are really underrating how much Gio brings to this team. In his abilities and by pushing everyone down a spot.

I agree that posted roster isn't a lottery team, but they aren't a contender either. Which is the ultimate goal.

[Hugh Jahrmes]

Yeah, bax has a great point Id thought about too. Saying how guys played without Gio, and making a huge leap of faith that they can do this for 82 [+++playoffs] are completely different scenarios.

[Fire]

Originally Posted by Hugh Jahrmes

Honest question:

Is missing the playoffs an absolute failure for next year?

We expected to be bottom 3 bad last year.

Some basic progression would have us in the middle of the team's missing the dance this year.. Do we make / not make moves that have negative long term outcome to try to do it this year?

Before the addition of Hamilton? No.
After the addition of Hamilton? Yes.

Adding Frolik helps as well, but if they are force to trade Hudler/Giordano instead of losing them for nothing that would obviously hurt their chances.

With this D core and the up and coming players up front (Gaudreau, Monahan, Bennett, Ferland) this team should be in the playoffs playing in the weakest NHL division.

[bax]

Originally Posted by Fire

Before the addition of Hamilton? No.
After the addition of Hamilton? Yes.

Adding Frolik helps as well, but if they are force to trade Hudler/Giordano instead of losing them for nothing that would obviously hurt their chances.

With this D core and the up and coming players up front (Gaudreau, Monahan, Bennett, Ferland) this team should be in the playoffs playing in the weakest NHL division.

I agree. Missing the playoffs may not be a complete failure (injuries happen), but it would definitely be a huge disappointment

[Hugh Jahrmes]

If our net is:

+Hamilton, Frolik, Assets geared at long term success
-Giordano, Hudler

It's next to impossible to predict where we end up

Hope we have some resolution to all of this soon.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by Hugh Jahrmes

Honest question:

Is missing the playoffs an absolute failure for next year?

We expected to be bottom 3 bad last year.

Some basic progression would have us in the middle of the team's missing the dance this year.. Do we make / not make moves that have negative long term outcome to try to do it this year?

There is one fact for me that would unequivocally make missing the playoffs a disappointment next season: the Flames have a top 3 defense group in the league, if not the best.

You don't miss the playoffs with the best D in the league.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by heep223

This is pretty significant I'd say, considering that many teams model in a slight increase in the cap every year in their long term planning. And the drop in CAD certainly does have an obvious impact on the Flames as Ricardo points out, revenues are in CAD and payroll is in USD. This has a significant detrimental impact on their bottom line. Though I agree that it's silly to wonder whether it will impact the Flames ownership group as to whether they'll spend to the cap - they will and they've given the green light over and over to do so, regardless of business conditions.

Yeah, this was the impetus behind my response to ricardo in the first place. To sum up: Yes, the devalued Canadian dollar is likely to have an impact on league-wide revenues, which will in turn affect the cap (though I would consider my completely baseless estimate of a 3–5% drop next year to be exceptionally high). No, this will not have an impact on the Flame ability, nor their mandate to spend to the cap.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

so there would be no problem in your mind if the Cap drops from 71.4 back to 69M? The Flames current cap spending for this year is 68.8.

I'm going to ignore your uncalled for outburst and point out that this followup question is NOT THE SAME question to which I responded:

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Will the Flames be able to spend to the cap? The contracts are in USD. Revenues are in CAD.

It is a bizarre question to pose in the light of the Flames ownership situation and their long-term commitment to the hockey team. In short, no. A reduction in revenues as a result of a devalued Canadian dollar will present no impediment to the Flames' ability to spend to the cap.

[Enoch Root]

There is no doubt that the Flames would hedge their currency exposure, like pretty much every cross-border business does. The only question would be how much? (many businesses hedge less than 100% of their exposed revenues)

The more interesting question is: does that impact HRR?

My opinion would be that it does not. HRR is a revenue number. The Flames revenues are earned in Canadian dollars. That amount would be converted to US dollars and that would be what is included in the calculation.

The profit/loss from currency hedging would be a line item that would be outside of the HRR calculation, I would guess.

Now it may be that the NHLPA has negotiated it into the formula. If so, I would think that there would be set parameters, and that it would be mandatory. But more likely, it simply isn't included.

IMPACT:

If currency hedging is included, then the dollar has essentially no impact on HRR in the short term of say, one year (or however far out teams are hedging their exposure). But that is contrary to everything we read on the subject.

If not included, then the weak dollar reduces HRR (as everyone assumes), but Canadian teams remain healthy - and in fact, depending on the amount of revenues hedged, could actually be better off because revenues would remain the same (in USD terms) but HRR - and thus player salaries - would go down.

[Finger Cookin]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

There is no doubt that the Flames would hedge their currency exposure, like pretty much every cross-border business does. The only question would be how much? (many businesses hedge less than 100% of their exposed revenues)

The more interesting question is: does that impact HRR?

The CBA states that HRR shall not include "Investments in, and the proceeds from investments in, currency contracts, equities, options, and other financial derivatives;" in Article 50.1 (b) (x) on page 242. So you're correct, hedging doesn't impact HRR.

[Vulcan]

Anyone who remembers the Flames situation in the 90s when the Canadian dollar was low knows that the Flames had an internal cap and it really affected our ability to get and to hold onto players. This made the team bad and with a bad team, attendance went down creating a worse situation. The bargaining agreement making all teams have a cap and equalization payments will probably make our situation less dire but it still could be affected.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Anyone who remembers the Flames situation in the 90s when the Canadian dollar was low knows that the Flames had an internal cap and it really affected our ability to get and to hold onto players. This made the team bad and with a bad team, attendance went down creating a worse situation. The bargaining agreement making all teams have a cap and equalization payments will probably make our situation less dire but it still could be affected.

This ownership group has stated multiple times that Treliving has a full green light to spend to the cap.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by heep223

This ownership group has stated multiple times that Treliving has a full green light to spend to the cap.

That was before the dollar and the price of oil took a nose dive. It may still be in effect but it could also be something that could change.

[PugnaciousIntern]

Originally Posted by Hugh Jahrmes

Honest question:

Is missing the playoffs an absolute failure for next year?

We expected to be bottom 3 bad last year.

Some basic progression would have us in the middle of the team's missing the dance this year.. Do we make / not make moves that have negative long term outcome to try to do it this year?

Yes. I don't think it's particularly fair (like I didn't think last year's projections were fair) but the standards are set. Everyone in the league is just waiting for 'the regression', and allowing them that satisfaction is a failure in my mind.

[BrownDrake]

I think the team was 12-6-3 over his absence and won a round in the playoffs. Since then we have added a young stud in Hamilton and picked up some good young Dmen in the draft that could be 3-4 dmen in 2 to 4 years when this team is supposed to contend. Also good projects and potential in Morrison and Hickey.

I think the Gio Camp has received a 4 or 5 year take it or leave it deal and the Flames are looking at Franson or other options to land another 3-4 defenseman if Gio says no.

Likely returns will be fairly disappointing (probably a 1st, and a good prospect, maybe an additional 2nd if he is signed long term - all of this is better than losing him for nothing.

He has an injury history and hasn't even played since suffering a terrible injury.

No way this management team offers him a 6 or 7 year deal. Give him a 4 year 34 million dollar deal (10, 9, 8, 7), they won't be accused of not offering him what he is worth that's for sure.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Anyone who remembers the Flames situation in the 90s when the Canadian dollar was low knows that the Flames had an internal cap and it really affected our ability to get and to hold onto players. This made the team bad and with a bad team, attendance went down creating a worse situation. The bargaining agreement making all teams have a cap and equalization payments will probably make our situation less dire but it still could be affected.

Revenues were much lower in the '90s. The Canadian dollar was much lower in the '90s. The Flames inability to compete was more a product of the enormous separation that existed between teams without any limitations on spending, and those with severe limitations. The cap has effectively created a balance in spending that dramatically reduces the potential for this form of inequality. In other words, with the existence of HRR and a cap, the devalue in the Canadian dollar will impact HRR which affects ALL teams. In the '90s there was no such limitations in place that governed spending.

In other words, this is likely not an issue.

[bax]

Originally Posted by BrownDrake

I think the Gio Camp has received a 4 or 5 year take it or leave it deal and the Flames are looking at Franson or other options to land another 3-4 defenseman if Gio says no.

I agree with most of your post, but there is absolutely no way Treliving offered his captain a "take it or leave it" offer extension a full year before he becomes a free agent.

It's a negotiation with very few comparables. It will take time.

[Fire]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

That was before the dollar and the price of oil took a nose dive. It may still be in effect but it could also be something that could change.

The dollar was crap this summer and was widely expected to stay crappy for a while and the Flames are spending to the cap this season. So no, I don't think they have an issue with spending to the cap with a low CDN dollar. The Cap not rising as fast and potentially getting some player salary coming back helps the situation.