QOTD: Would you deal Curtis Glencross?

[Where ru Chris O'Sullivan]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Did Burke pass on a 2nd round pick for Cammaleri?

Don't think that's what happened.

Not 100% sure, but a 3rd and warm body wasn't acceptable, i assume this meant late 2nds weren't of interest either.

The actual point is this management team has proven they wont drop players for nothing, even if it clearly means losing them for nothing in the off-season. This was last year where we knew clearly we were not making a playoff push and cammy would be golfing.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by Where ru Chris O'Sullivan

No. Cant flip 25 goal potential for 4th rounders (unless they are on their last legs 34+). No.

Glencross has scored 25 goals once in his career. 3 years ago.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Cammalleri > Glencross and the price at the deadline for Cammalleri was a 2nd rounder and no one was willing to pay it.

I wouldn't take last year as a guideline for trade value. It was a weird year and NYI seemed to screw the whole market with everyone waiting for Vanek to move.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Where ru Chris O'Sullivan

Not 100% sure, but a 3rd and warm body wasn't acceptable, i assume this meant late 2nds weren't of interest either. .

What do you mean not 100% sure? This is the first time I've heard Burke passing on a 2nd round pick for Cammaleri (Cammy!!), and you seemed pretty sure of it replying to Table 5's post to order to prove your point.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

A late 2nd isn't enough?

I get what you're saying about the playoff run, but it's basically a scenario of saying "only if they pay this impossible price", you might as well just come out and say you're not willing to move him because of playoffs.

And if playoffs is the reason for not moving, I think the motivation is dead wrong.

Cammalleri > Glencross and the price at the deadline for Cammalleri was a 2nd rounder and no one was willing to pay it.

If you get an offer for a 4th rounder for a guy who is clearly not going to be on the team in 12 weeks, you pull the trigger. Maybe you try to hold out for a 3rd, but Glencross is a 15-17 minute a night player now.

Playoffs this year are mostly meaningless, Calgary just isn't a contender. Depth at forward isn't a concern for the roster, we saw that during the course of the season. Depth at defense however is a huge concern and one injury there basically hoops the Flames.

It's irresponsible to not move Glencross to mistakenly get 6 or 7 games in the playoffs instead of 4 or 5.

You get a 4th in this years draft, you get an opportunity to pull a Brodie or a Gaudreau out of the hat for a guy who won't be here anyway by the time your kids get out of school.

That's not the point - it isn't saying: the playoffs this year are important. It's saying: if you don't get a good enough asset back, better to keep him as part of the playoff run that we are going to have, whether it's gravy or not.

As for the Cammalleri comment - last year was the exception, with unusual circumstances. And you know that.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Where ru Chris O'Sullivan

Not 100% sure, but a 3rd and warm body wasn't acceptable, i assume this meant late 2nds weren't of interest either.

The actual point is this management team has proven they wont drop players for nothing, even if it clearly means losing them for nothing in the off-season. This was last year where we knew clearly we were not making a playoff push and cammy would be golfing.

It's not that you don't give them away for nothing, it's that you don't give them away for less than the selling price you initially set them at.

Cammalleri was priced at a 2nd round pick for Calgary and there is an argument to be made that was an appropriate valuation. Last season, Cammalleri scored 18 more goals in 15 more games than Glencross has managed this season.

When compared straight across Cammalleri is a more significant asset last season than Glencross is this season, was outproducing him and is outproducing him this season.

If you're going to pin the valuation of Glencross at a 2nd round pick, you may as well peg it at a 1st, they are in my opinion, equally as likely to happen.

Glencross, as an injured rental, is worth roughly a 4th. If you get a 3rd round pick as an offer, you've done well for yourself.

[Where ru Chris O'Sullivan]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

What do you mean not 100% sure? This is the first time I've heard Burke passing on a 2nd round pick for Cammaleri (Cammy!!), and you seemed pretty sure of it replying to Table 5's post to order to prove your point.

Tweet Francis and get us the true scoop, ill accept that as gospel.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Where ru Chris O'Sullivan

Tweet Francis and get us the true scoop, ill accept that as gospel.

You do it..? It was your point. I was hoping you had seen/heard it somewhere, not just made it up to prove a point.

[Where ru Chris O'Sullivan]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

It's not that you don't give them away for nothing, it's that you don't give them away for less than the selling price you initially set them at.

Cammalleri was priced at a 2nd round pick for Calgary and there is an argument to be made that was an appropriate valuation. Last season, Cammalleri scored 18 more goals in 15 more games than Glencross has managed this season.

When compared straight across Cammalleri is a more significant asset last season than Glencross is this season, was outproducing him and is outproducing him this season.

If you're going to pin the valuation of Glencross at a 2nd round pick, you may as well peg it at a 1st, they are in my opinion, equally as likely to happen.

Glencross, as an injured rental, is worth roughly a 4th. If you get a 3rd round pick as an offer, you've done well for yourself.

I understand, but I wouldn't flip him for a 3rd or a 4th when at current pace were heading for the playoffs. We need more production, not less.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

It's not that you don't give them away for nothing, it's that you don't give them away for less than the selling price you initially set them at.

Cammalleri was priced at a 2nd round pick for Calgary and there is an argument to be made that was an appropriate valuation. Last season, Cammalleri scored 18 more goals in 15 more games than Glencross has managed this season.

When compared straight across Cammalleri is a more significant asset last season than Glencross is this season, was outproducing him and is outproducing him this season.

If you're going to pin the valuation of Glencross at a 2nd round pick, you may as well peg it at a 1st, they are in my opinion, equally as likely to happen.

Glencross, as an injured rental, is worth roughly a 4th. If you get a 3rd round pick as an offer, you've done well for yourself.

I think all of what you're saying is true. So with it said, and with the Flames being in a playoff position vs a lottery position, wouldn't you say it would make more sense to keep Glencross rather than trade him for a 3rd or lower?

To add a 3rd rounder to the plethora of the types of players you get in that range that we already have (with a way outside longshot at getting a diamond in the rough), doesn't seem worth giving up a player who could be very helpful in a playoff series (or more).

[saillias]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

It's not that you don't give them away for nothing, it's that you don't give them away for less than the selling price you initially set them at.

Cammalleri was priced at a 2nd round pick for Calgary and there is an argument to be made that was an appropriate valuation. Last season, Cammalleri scored 18 more goals in 15 more games than Glencross has managed this season.

When compared straight across Cammalleri is a more significant asset last season than Glencross is this season, was outproducing him and is outproducing him this season.

If you're going to pin the valuation of Glencross at a 2nd round pick, you may as well peg it at a 1st, they are in my opinion, equally as likely to happen.

Glencross, as an injured rental, is worth roughly a 4th. If you get a 3rd round pick as an offer, you've done well for yourself.

Not sure how you are coming to the value of Glencross = 4th, even last year Stempniak got a 3rd.

[Where ru Chris O'Sullivan]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

Glencross has scored 25 goals once in his career. 3 years ago.

He's been on or very near that pace for 4 years consecutively. Injuries and work stoppages do happen.

Other flames players get this 'credit', it should go all around.

[Flash Walken]

Fer chrissakes, Burke put the price at a 2nd in the end, was only offered a 3rd, didn't do the deal.

This was confirmed at a season ticket holder meeting and discussed here on CP.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by Where ru Chris O'Sullivan

He's been on or very near that pace for 4 years consecutively. Injuries and work stoppages do happen.

Other flames players get this 'credit', it should go all around.

If he's often injured he won't hit 25 goals. You shouldn't be given slack because you're on the IR a lot.

[Where ru Chris O'Sullivan]

Originally Posted by MattyC

I think all of what you're saying is true. So with it said, and with the Flames being in a playoff position vs a lottery position, wouldn't you say it would make more sense to keep Glencross rather than trade him for a 3rd or lower?

To add a 3rd rounder to the plethora of the types of players you get in that range that we already have (with a way outside longshot at getting a diamond in the rough), doesn't seem worth giving up a player who could be very helpful in a playoff series (or more).

Also consider the optics....

Took a hometown discount, 25 goal avg. throughout, had some injury issues and the team flipped him for a 4th during a playoff run, to roll out Bollig and Byron...

In 2 years from now when were a contender and are looking to sign players to come here, this will be the conversation between player and agent....

8 goals in 48 games isn't that despicable!

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by saillias

Not sure how you are coming to the value of Glencross = 4th, even last year Stempniak got a 3rd.

Yep, that's true, and that's the wiggle room for a deal.

You price him at a 2nd and hope you get a Berra-esque return. You look at the roster at the time and gauge your injury situation and if a team offers a 4th and or a prospect you like, I think you make the deal, depending on what team it is.

The undercurrent here appears to be Glencross is gone no matter what.

If the Jets want him it's a 2nd round pick. If anaheim, pittsburgh or boston want him, it's a 3rd rounder or a prospect.

[foshizzle11]

I said "Yes, asset management and a rebuild timeline says move him" because if he doesn't re-sign here then they should get something for him. If they can sign him before the deadline, he doesn't get moved and he stays here for a playoff run.

I would prefer that he is traded for some help on the back end, maybe another pending UFA, but just don't sell the future for the playoffs this season. He should only be moved if it can help us now or is a 2nd rounder or better.

If that isn't an option, then maybe he is part of a larger package to get a better top 4 defenseman, someone who can be a part of the rebuild and help us now. The price will be high but would likely jump our rebuild ahead a bit.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by Where ru Chris O'Sullivan

Took a hometown discount, 25 goal avg. throughout,

I have no idea why you keep bringing up the magical number of 25.

He's done it once. Once. It's not an average, not even close.

[Where ru Chris O'Sullivan]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

If he's often injured he won't hit 25 goals. You shouldn't be given slack because you're on the IR a lot.

And that's why were here typing. If he had 25 on the board without injury time this wouldn't be a discussion.

But the talent of his replacements (even without injury issues) are well below him, at this time.

I'm fine to let him go at the end of the season for nothing, using him as insurance of injury.

[Where ru Chris O'Sullivan]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

I have no idea why you keep bringing up the magical number of 25.

He's done it once. Once. It's not an average, not even close.

Pro-rated, Goals divided by games x 82, seems to hit that number yearly four years consec.

Not too many hit 25 in a work stoppage?