[Rumour] Friedman: Flames and Hanifin have made progress on contract extension

[FlamesAddiction]

Even if he is extended, it doesn't mean that he can't be a tradeable asset it the future. The deal will of course come with an NMC, because they all do these days, but those can be waived.

I just don't see the downside to keeping a good player in his prime years. Caveat of course being what the cap hit is.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Based on NHL.com's figures for opening-day rosters, the Flames have an average age of 28.5. They are tied with the Rangers for the 11th oldest roster in the league.

Los Angeles, Tampa Bay, Colorado, Dallas, the Islanders, Washington, Minnesota, Seattle, Carolina, and Pittsburgh are all older.

The league mean is 28.1, with a median of 28.25.

This isn't an ancient roster.

Now, if Trevor Lewis (36), Milan Lucic (34), Michael Stone (32), and Tyler Toffoli (30) were still on the roster, you might have a case. As it is, I think you've carried over your impression of the team's age from last year.

Would be interesting to see an ice time weighted version.

[Redrum]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

So because other players are old, Hanifin magically becomes untradeable? How's that one work?

Teams just don't take on those contracts. Why would you risk it taking on an anchor, unless you're getting a real top impact player?

[Redrum]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Moving of goalposts duly noted.

I moved them closer, because you didn't get it.

[Ashasx]

An extension usually comes with a no movement clause of some sort and severely limits the ability to trade the player.

Not impossible, but unless Hanifin takes another step, I think he has more value as a to-be UFA right now than three years from now, 2 years into an 8 year contract.

[dino7c]

You guys know damn well if the Flames trade Hanifin he will making big plays and scoring big goals on a cup run lol

[Locke]

Originally Posted by dino7c

You guys know damn well if the Flames trade Hanifin he will making big plays and scoring big goals on a cup run lol

So what?

Its as though you're saying he's making 'Big plays on a team on a Cup run' equates to him making those 'big plays' as a Flame.

For starters there are no assurances of that and moreso, we're probably not going to be on a 'Cup run' anytime soon, so maybe him making those 'big plays' on game 65 of the regular season are going to mean...a smidge less?

[CGY12]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Even if he is extended, it doesn't mean that he can't be a tradeable asset it the future. The deal will of course come with an NMC, because they all do these days, but those can be waived.

I just don't see the downside to keeping a good player in his prime years. Caveat of course being what the cap hit is.

It is much more difficult trading a player who is on a long term contract, teams don't like taking on term when the cap number is basically unknown long term. His number isn't going to be small either.

We are 5 games into the season, why are they making long term decisions so quickly into the season? Especially considering last years failure. If this is true, lumped in with the Backlund signing, it seems the mandate/strategy is status quo from BTs tenure, sprinkled in with giving a few young guys more ice time.

They are in a tough spot but I think handing out long term contracts without seeing if this core can do anything together is a big mistake. What's the issue of waiting till American thanksgiving or Christmas break?

[howard_the_duck]

Hanifin is in the right age to extend, in the right situation.

Flames aren’t in that situation. His trade return (and free’d up cap space) is more interesting to me than fixing the cap with players that are ‘pieces’ but not core.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by CGY12

I couldn't agree more. Giving Hanifin max term and a big dollar amount is a terrible idea. He is the most overrated player on the roster.

Also if true, this seems like a rookie mistake by Conroy. Why not wait till later on in the season to see where the team is before handing out major contracts?

Around in circles we go.

How is a 26 year old minute munching defenceman with metrics in the top 50 for dmen in the league (that's first pairing by quantity) on a team friendly deal over rated?

I have concern with adding a 30 year old Lindholm on an 8 year contract.

Way less concern adding a 26 year old defenseman on max term.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by CGY12

It is much more difficult trading a player who is on a long term contract, teams don't like taking on term when the cap number is basically unknown long term. His number isn't going to be small either.

We are 5 games into the season, why are they making long term decisions so quickly into the season? Especially considering last years failure. If this is true, lumped in with the Backlund signing, it seems the mandate/strategy is status quo from BTs tenure, sprinkled in with giving a few young guys more ice time.

They are in a tough spot but I think handing out long term contracts without seeing if this core can do anything together is a big mistake. What's the issue of waiting till American thanksgiving or Christmas break?

That’s assuming they are in wait and see mode to decide whether to trade or sign them. I think the plan is to sign Hanifin and Lindholm and then pivot by the quarter season mark if they don’t. Another 20 games won’t change their long term plan on core pieces. Im hoping more and more that Lindholm says he wants out and then they can tinker with the roster.

[MillerTime GFG]

This franchise is in DEEP trouble if we sign him and Lindholm. And I fully expect us to do it. It’s basically guaranteeing mediocrity for the next 6-7 years.

Status quo.

[dammage79]

Am I wrong in thinking the Flames can really only sign one of the remaining pending FAs? Like if Hanifin stays I don't see any way Lindholm signs under the cap no matter how high it goes?

Flames will have Hanifin, weegar and Andersson locked up on D so they'll need room to round out the Defense next season moving forward.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I have concern with adding a 30 year old Lindholm on an 8 year contract.

Way less concern adding a 26 year old defenseman on max term.

They’re almost exactly two years apart, not four.

Hanifin will be 27 and Lindholm will be 29.

[gvitaly]

I'm not concerned about term with Hanifin. That said, I think that anything over $6.5M is not worth it. Maybe Toews signing for $7.25, made Hanifin come back down to earth for his ask.

I'm mostly worried about his ability to shutdown top players. I also don't think that he and Andersson are an ideal first pairing. I think we could use someone like Skjei to generate more offense and scoring from the backend.

[CGY12]

Originally Posted by Bingo

How is a 26 year old minute munching defenceman with metrics in the top 50 for dmen in the league (that's first pairing by quantity) on a team friendly deal over rated?

I have concern with adding a 30 year old Lindholm on an 8 year contract.

Way less concern adding a 26 year old defenseman on max term.

To be clear I'm not a fan of giving Lindholm max term/dollar either. I'm not a fan of giving anybody an 8 year contract, on a team that has proven next to nothing together. I think he's overrated, doesn't mean I think he's a bad player. IMO he leaves a lot to be desired for somebody who has the size and skating ability, that he does. Given his age, he also probably has maybe the most value of anybody on the roster. Given the situation of the team, why is this happening so early? We are an average team with a max roster, does it make sense that we are locking in long term with guys so early? We are already up against cap wise with Hubby and Kadri.

[CGY12]

Originally Posted by Bonded

That’s assuming they are in wait and see mode to decide whether to trade or sign them. I think the plan is to sign Hanifin and Lindholm and then pivot by the quarter season mark if they don’t. Another 20 games won’t change their long term plan on core pieces. Im hoping more and more that Lindholm says he wants out and then they can tinker with the roster.

edit: read that wrong. I get what your saying.

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Even if he is extended, it doesn't mean that he can't be a tradeable asset it the future. The deal will of course come with an NMC, because they all do these days, but those can be waived.

I just don't see the downside to keeping a good player in his prime years. Caveat of course being what the cap hit is.

If the Flames are working towards an extension, you can pretty much guarantee it’s for term with some form of NTC or NMC.

Also the way it’s being reported leads me to believe it’s not a sign and trade, so he’s not going anywhere.

I think it’s a mistake to invest anymore in this core until we see where we are in 2-3 months. If we’re outside looking in then moving these UFAs makes far more sense, guys like Hanifin and Lindholm are looking for big money and long term, both of which we’re handcuffed in 30+ year olds already.

This core hasn’t shown being worth the investment, but alas this would be the most flames thing to do, refuse to see the hand that’s dealt and instead try to chase a dream with a roster that lacks high end skill.

[Jiri Hrdina]

The Flames need D next season. And there is little coming in the pipeline

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

The Flames need D next season. And there is little coming in the pipeline

Free agents next off season:
Montour, Frosling, DeAngelo, Grezlyck, Pesce, Skjei, Dumba, Brodie, Gostisbehere, Dillon, DeMelo, Hakanpaa.

3rd pairing PP specialists: Klingberg, Barrie, Gustafsson

3rd pairing options: C. Miller, Forbort, Chatfield, Rosen, Aho, Stetcher

My point is that there are options. Also Poirier is looking pretty good in the AHL right now. We have him and Solovyov as options for the 3rd pairing next year.