What is a fair Joe Colborne contract?

[Traditional_Ale]

I am so not interested in re-signing a big softy. Save the money and move on.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Frolik was projected to get a lot more than what he signed for. It's a great deal.

so Frolik after a 42 pt 82 game season should have gotten more, deserved more than 4.3 x4?

Colborne is coming off a 44 pt in 76 game season with 1 year RFA. say 2.5 M for his RFA year and 5M x3 for his 3 ufa years.... 17.5 for 4 years.

How is Frolik a good deal at that price and nobody sees bigger stronger Colborne as anywhere near that deal.

The reason is that Frolik was and incredibly bad deal.

[bigrangy]

The reason Frolik's deal is fair is because he had established himself as a 0.5 P/G player though the previous three years, all while playing in a non-sheltered role, without an anomalous shooting percentage, and still having a positive corsirel% at ES.

To sign Colborne to the same deal, it wouldn't be fair because Colborne, hasn't established himself as anything really over the past 3 years, turned up a huge performance is a contract year when the games didn't matter, had an anomalous shooting percentage, and doesn't have a positive impact on corsirel%.

The only point Colborne has in his favour is that he was pretty much a 3rd year player this year, who knows if this is his new normal of if it was a fluke. I'm not committing 3.6 mil long term to Colborne to take that risk and I like Colborne. Trade him while the value is high, or force him to play under his qualifying offer, hell just take the offer sheet compensation that he will surely be able to provide the Flames.

[Itse]

To put it another way:

Frolik is a good two-way player. Colborne is not.

[nik-]

I honestly think that Joe Colborne is the biggest potential landmine contract that the Flames could sign in the next bit here.

After next season, a lot of the ugly is gone, I really hope we don't add another.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by nik-

I honestly think that Joe Colborne is the biggest potential landmine contract that the Flames could sign in the next bit here.

Agreed. Emphasis on the word 'potential' though. It might work out.

On the other hand, if he learns to play defense (which unlike offense can come to players later in their careers), he could be a real steal.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

so Frolik after a 42 pt 82 game season should have gotten more, deserved more than 4.3 x4?

Colborne is coming off a 44 pt in 76 game season with 1 year RFA. say 2.5 M for his RFA year and 5M x3 for his 3 ufa years.... 17.5 for 4 years.

How is Frolik a good deal at that price and nobody sees bigger stronger Colborne as anywhere near that deal.

The reason is that Frolik was and incredibly bad deal.

Very easy answer:

1. Consistency of results - Frolik is worth that because he's put up those numbers multiple times prior to signing that deal, he's proven that he can do it consistently. Colborne has not yet done that, therefore doesn't deserve the pay day yet.

2. Colborne may have put up a handful of more points in one season, but the rest of his game isn't close to Frolik's. And for a change, we are in a situation where we can actually prove that, versus it being a debatable point in regards to the players two way games. Frolik's + 1 on while putting up .5 ppg and Colborne's -19 while putting up about the same number of points is very telling given they play on the same team, and if anything, Frolik got tougher ice time.

[killer_carlson]

Originally Posted by nik-

I honestly think that Joe Colborne is the biggest potential landmine contract that the Flames could sign in the next bit here.

After next season, a lot of the ugly is gone, I really hope we don't add another.

I think Colborne could be a landmine, but the one that has me more concerned is if Cgy, Edm and Van get into a bidding war for Lucic. the team that wins the bidding war could have a very big, very long term contract on their hands.

and I really want Lucic on our top line.

Even if one team is a front runner, the other could intentionally drive up the price to handcuff their rival.

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

I agree the Bouma deal wasn't a good one. But the Flames are far from cap trouble. Saying we are in cap trouble ignores the fact the cap trouble goes away next season.

We aren't at risk of not being able to sign any assets we truly care about (our core) which is all that matters. The only reason people are even thinking we have cap issues is because, one, some our young core are better quicker than we thought, two, Treliving added an amazing young D piece unexpectedly to our core last year, and three, and this one is must important, the team became competitive quicker than expected. Flames brass gave Treliving to spend during our rebuild so we didn't go full Oiler. Turned out our young guys progressed faster than thought, making fans impatient about our cap situation and impatient about freeing up money right away to fill our gaps.

But all of these are good problems to have. I'm not saying Treliving hasn't made any mistakes, Bouma us a great example. But his body of work has been good to date. Worst case scenario with Colborne is we have to walk away from a decent but not great player, we will survive.

To me Bouma's contract set a high bar for 4th line players, and my worry is that agents will point to it as a way of getting more for their clients. Bouma's contract means we probably don't get Joe at the 2-2.5 that makes sense.

Originally Posted by ricardodw

somehow it's Bouma's 2.2 M and not Hamilton's 5.75 , Frolik's 4.3 or Gio's 6.75.

He was the first name that came to mind. Frolik is a 3rd line player on a good team, yes his contract is too high. I am fine with Hamilton and Gio.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The cap will probably be about $74M and you think Treliving has painted himself into a corner by paying Bouma - a very servicable, physical and versatile player - $2.2M?

$2.2 is a million below the average at $74M.

You can dislike the contract if you want, but it has definitely not painted the Flames into a corner.

You are right. I should have just said I think he is paying too much for supporting players.

Originally Posted by The Fonz

If Colborne is going to cost 3M going forward, then the Flames need to trade him.
I'm not convinced that he's a top 6 forward, and teams get killed cap-wise when they overpay the bottom half of their roster.

I don't believe we'll be a contender with contracts like Colborne (3.5), Stajan (3.2), Raymond (3.15), Bollig (1.3), Smid (3.5), and Engellend (3) on the books. I'm quickly becoming of the opinion that players are either consistent high end NHL talent, or they're expendable, and they need to be paid accordingly. There are no shortage of guys like Hathaway, Nakladal, Grant, etc, toiling away in lesser leagues, and they'd gladly take league minimum if it meant a 1-way NHL contract.

On a somewhat related note, if Josh Jooris gets more than 800k from this team, I'm going to snap. I don't care that his qualifying offer is around 1M... he is the definition of expendable. He's the type of player that should be on a league minimum contract, as there is a line of guys behind him who would gladly play for that, and they'd play just as well.

This is what I was getting at, you stated it much better than I did.

[Badgers Nose]

Totally arbitrary, but does this roughly work as a budget:

$32 million on the first two lines
$15 million on the last two lines
$22 on defence
$5 on goaltending

Obviously you adjust for super stars, like if we had a Cary Price type goalie etc.

If this is a good ratio than Flames are pretty screwed up, and Joe does not fit here - nor do a bunch of current Flames.

They need more Brodie-type contracts and less Bollig/Stajan contracts.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

Totally arbitrary, but does this roughly work as a budget:

$32 million on the first two lines
$15 million on the last two lines
$22 on defence
$5 on goaltending

Obviously you adjust for super stars, like if we had a Cary Price type goalie etc.

If this is a good ratio than Flames are pretty screwed up, and Joe does not fit here - nor do a bunch of current Flames.

They need more Brodie-type contracts and less Bollig/Stajan contracts.

Here's what a $70M budget looks like.

$7M-$7M-$5M
$3M-$5M-$3M
$2M-$3M-$2M
$1M-$1M-$1M
$.75M-$.75M

$7M-$5M
$4M-$3M
$2M-$1.5M
.75M

$5M
$1M

Treliving has signed some guys that kind of blow the budget, but not in a really big way. Has some work to do to get things straightened out.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I haven't read all of this thread, but I happen to really love Colborne. I think right now he is worth around 2.5 million. Maybe a bit more.

I hope the Flame sign him on a 1 year deal, and then see how he does next year. If he continues to get better, I would like to see him locked up on a 4-5 year deal. He has good speed, offers the Flames something very rare organizationally with his size + skill combo, and has the added benefit of loving to be a Flame.

People dislike him because he isn't a bruiser. He isn't a butterfly either. He is getting way better along the boards and gaining confidence in using his size. I am fine with the way his physical game is now - he at least battles much more consistently (and effectively) along the boards, and that is something that the Flames need more of.

[Hackey]

Would rather use the money to sign someone else or give the spot to a prospect. Colborne is decent but he's not going to be a difference maker long term.

[Badgers Nose]

At 2.5 Joe is a no brainer, for me at least. It means the you need a Poirier or Klimchuck to play wing on the third with Joe and Backlund. That's feasible.

But some folks have well-reasoned opinions that he might fetch 3.7-3.9 in arb. That's scary.

[browna]

As other posters have said, have to be pretty weary of guys putting up good stats the final few months of the “lost“ season, as injuries crept in, and of course after the shuttling out of day to day players at the trade deadline. Backlund and Colborne both benefitted from Jones and Hudler leaving, and Frolik injured, and got the ice time they got and pp opportunities.

Good for those player as individuals, they took the extra ice time and role and ran with it and made the most of it to have things look good on the peice of paper they bring into contract negotiations with the Flames or whoever is willing to pay them.

From a long term team aspect though for the Flames, there is enough history there with those players over previous years that it's really hard to project that the spike in overall stats is going to continue long term. Or is it easy to assume that the seemingly improved play in general is more then a direct effect of that increased ice time in garbage time" for a lower tier team, playing out the string.

Especially if the team replaces and retools more than just then Hudler and Jones replacements (which they need to, to avoid picking 6th worst in the draft again) as these guy may well be back to the role that they were for the first 6 unspectacular months of the season and prior seasons... and that's not yet factoring in the new coach who these, and all players, have to re-impress and show what value they bring over someone else on the roster (or available from another team)

[calgaryblood]

Can anyone really picture Joe Colborne in the playoffs playing against the bottom 6 of either LA, San Jose, Chicago, Anaheim? He's not good enough to be top 6 so would you want him in a checking role or a fourth line role against any one of those teams?

Honest question, if we are trying to build a contender I just don't see where Colborne fits.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

so Frolik after a 42 pt 82 game season should have gotten more, deserved more than 4.3 x4?

Colborne is coming off a 44 pt in 76 game season with 1 year RFA. say 2.5 M for his RFA year and 5M x3 for his 3 ufa years.... 17.5 for 4 years.

How is Frolik a good deal at that price and nobody sees bigger stronger Colborne as anywhere near that deal.

The reason is that Frolik was and incredibly bad deal.

Frolik was an UFA

Colborne is a RFA

They aren't comparable at all. UFAs are generally paid considerably more than RFAs.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

If Colborne is going to cost 3M going forward, then the Flames need to trade him.
I'm not convinced that he's a top 6 forward, and teams get killed cap-wise when they overpay the bottom half of their roster.

I don't believe we'll be a contender with contracts like Colborne (3.5), Stajan (3.2), Raymond (3.15), Bollig (1.3), Smid (3.5), and Engellend (3) on the books. I'm quickly becoming of the opinion that players are either consistent high end NHL talent, or they're expendable, and they need to be paid accordingly. There are no shortage of guys like Hathaway, Nakladal, Grant, etc, toiling away in lesser leagues, and they'd gladly take league minimum if it meant a 1-way NHL contract.

Unless you expect the Flames to be a contender this year, then there really isn't a problem. Two of those contracts are off the books next summer, and the remaining two the year after.

Oh, and as a side note, the Sharks have Tommy Wingels @ $2.45 m, Joel Ward @ $3.275 m, and Nick Spaling @ $2.2 m. Sure, Ward looks like a great add in the playoffs, but the difference from his regular season performance is fairly analogous to how much better Colborne played in the playoffs last year than he did in the 2014–15 reg. season. The Penguins are paying Carl Hagelin $4.0 m a year, for three more years. If Hagelin is a $4.0 m player on a Stanley Cup contender, then I don't see how Colborne is realistically worth any less than $3.0 m, nor do I see how a contract in that range will irreparably cripple the Flames in the near future.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

so Frolik after a 42 pt 82 game season should have gotten more, deserved more than 4.3 x4?

Colborne is coming off a 44 pt in 76 game season with 1 year RFA. say 2.5 M for his RFA year and 5M x3 for his 3 ufa years.... 17.5 for 4 years.

How is Frolik a good deal at that price and nobody sees bigger stronger Colborne as anywhere near that deal.

The reason is that Frolik was and incredibly bad deal.

Huh?

Frolik isn't here for his points alone. He is here because he can play up and down the lineup (something Colborne cannot do) in a variety of roles. If the Flames dedicated him exclusive offensive zone ice time, you can bet he'd put up 60 points a year with his skill set. The thing is, he's way more valuable playing with Backlund, killing penalties etc.

What has Colborne ever done to convince you that last year - all 6 weeks of higher end scoring at that - is capable of continuing at that pace? He has been a perimeter floater his entire career here and quite frankly, is one of the reasons this team was not a playoff team last year. Had he played the last 2 years with the drive he showed for a fraction of the year last year, the Flames might have had an entirely different fate. Aside from a few shootout goals I don't see what his niche is on this team. Especially if you're talking about a 3M plus AAV deal.

No thanks, I'll pass. Especially considering we continue to send out contracts like Stajan, Smid, Bouma, Engelland on a nightly basis.

[Strange Brew]

I don't believe the poster said "irreparably cripple". That is a little dramatic. But the point is that as bad contracts expire, it would be nice not to replace with new bad contracts.

Colborne is useful player but I see no reason to sign him to a LT deal. let's see what he can prove next year.