[Signing] Sean Monahan Signs ELC

[MrMastodonFarm]

I think Monahan has a spot to lose going into camp. He'll have to be injured or really show he's not ready. I think the Flames are expecting to see him in those 9 regular season games at the least.

[$ven27]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Did anyone imply that management told the players to lose? I haven't read that anywhere. Maybe you could point that out for us?

Management didn't even try to sign a key player (ROR) and halfway into the season when it was apparent the team had quit on their coach didn't replace him in hopes of sparking the team like the Sabres tried. Their management seemed very content to ride out the season without ROR and with a coach that they had to know lost the team. The backup goaltender even publicly admitted that players on the team never cared and it was comical how the team actually picked up their play after the comments like the backup goaltender was a better motivator than the coach and the sad truth is he probably was.

Originally Posted by MattyC

But again, the mandate to lose from managment means they probably didn't care at all about a Vegas trip. And Giguere is just another guy that likes to win, and thus doesn't fit into the Avs plans moving forward.

There.
Management didn't sign ROR because he was demanding too much, and it was only because of us that he finally signed. What about Subban? Did their management "Not try" to sign him too? The only reason Sacco stuck around for so long was because it was a old boys club down there and Eric LaCroix and Sacco were very close. But I doubt I'm going to change 99% of CP's perception on this so let's move on people

[Coach]

Originally Posted by $ven27

There.
Management didn't sign ROR because he was demanding too much, and it was only because of us that he finally signed. What about Subban? Did their management "Not try" to sign him too? The only reason Sacco stuck around for so long was because it was a old boys club down there and Eric LaCroix and Sacco were very close. But I doubt I'm going to change 99% of CP's perception on this so let's move on people

Yes and you've obviously ignored the follow-up as much as the topic of the thread.


We have all gotten off track here. I'm sure there's another thread where tanking is the main topic.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

I think Monahan has a spot to lose going into camp. He'll have to be injured or really show he's not ready. I think the Flames are expecting to see him in those 9 regular season games at the least.

If he has to be one of the top two in camp to land an NHL spot then it will be a battle.
If he has to be one of the top four in camp then he's a lock.

The key to the above is what's best for the player and the team.

If playing third line minutes is good for his development compared to dominating in the OHL, then no problem. But if that stunts him then you have to look at the top two center spots as his hurdle.

Then you have to look at the Flames. Is burning a year of ELC a good idea? Is the difference between third line center and the OHL domination worth that year of UFA coming earlier?

Should that be a concern for a team that pays to the camp?
Should that be a concern for a player that seems like Richie Cunningham? (loyal)
Should the Flames let the marketing side of having him to talk about all season sway their opinion?

Lots to talk about

[dammage79]

I could see Monahan getting the third line minutes. Kind of puts him into direct competition with Knight in my mind though. Best case scenario is that they both have strong enough camps to supplant Stajan. Which is what I think the Flames want to happen as well. Nothing against Stajan at all. But the Youth movement is on.

Top three Centers could look like this (best case scenario):

1. Backlund
2. Monahan
3. Knight
Knight and Monahan being interchangeable.

Whole lot of unknown quantities here but I really do believe that the Flames are betting on Monahan and Knight to show they can own the 2-3 center spots for the whole year. Whether thats a long shot or not is anyones guess right now.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Best case scenario is that they both have strong enough camps to supplant Stajan. Which is what I think the Flames want to happen as well. Nothing against Stajan at all. But the Youth movement is on.

Top three Centers could look like this (best case scenario):

1. Backlund
2. Monahan
3. Knight
Knight and Monahan being interchangeable.

I'd prefer we run with this for the first 55 games:

1 - Stajan
2 - Backlund
3 - Monahan
4 - Knight/Reinhart

Deadline day: Trade Stajan

Last 27 games:

1 - Backlund
2 - Monahan
3 - Knight
4 - Reinhart

[moon]

As much as I want to watch Monahan in the Flames line-up next year I think it is likely best for him to go back to the OHL, get traded to a top team (London), be a big part of Canada at the WJHC and play for the Flames in 2014.

But I would expect the 9 game try out that he should get will tell us a lot about how ready he is. I just think without changes he fits well into the roster the Flames have right now.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Then you have to look at the Flames. Is burning a year of ELC a good idea? Is the difference between third line center and the OHL domination worth that year of UFA coming earlier?

Burning the first year of his ELC doesn't actually get him closer to becoming a UFA, does it? I thought it just means that he will get to that first RFA contract faster but he still stays an RFA until he turns 27.

If he goes through his ELC from age 18-21. Gets his first 4 or 5 year contract that takes him to 25 or 26 he would still be an RFA and the Flames would be able to then sign him to the 8 year contract to lock him up for the rest of his prime years.

I am a little fuzzy if that has changed with the new CBA but I thought that was the jist of it.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Wolven

Burning the first year of his ELC doesn't actually get him closer to becoming a UFA, does it? I thought it just means that he will get to that first RFA contract faster but he still stays an RFA until he turns 27.

If he goes through his ELC from age 18-21. Gets his first 4 or 5 year contract that takes him to 25 or 26 he would still be an RFA and the Flames would be able to then sign him to the 8 year contract to lock him up for the rest of his prime years.

I am a little fuzzy if that has changed with the new CBA but I thought that was the jist of it.

I believe UFA is 7 years or 27 so if he starts in the NHL at age 18 he becomes a UFA at 25. If he waits a year he becomes a UFA at 26. (I think)

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Wolven

Burning the first year of his ELC doesn't actually get him closer to becoming a UFA, does it? I thought it just means that he will get to that first RFA contract faster but he still stays an RFA until he turns 27.

If he goes through his ELC from age 18-21. Gets his first 4 or 5 year contract that takes him to 25 or 26 he would still be an RFA and the Flames would be able to then sign him to the 8 year contract to lock him up for the rest of his prime years.

I am a little fuzzy if that has changed with the new CBA but I thought that was the jist of it.

Bouw was 25 when the flames signed him as ufa. It is 7 years or 27 years old I believe

[T@T]

Originally Posted by moon

As much as I want to watch Monahan in the Flames line-up next year I think it is likely best for him to go back to the OHL, get traded to a top team (London), be a big part of Canada at the WJHC and play for the Flames in 2014.

I really get a kick out of this line of thinking, What's best? he's not a little physically immature pencil neck geek like RNH.If he's ready to play you let him play and learn to be better against the best players.

I wouldn't be against loaning him to the WJ's though.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by T@T

I wouldn't be against loaning him to the WJ's though.

I would, big time. Whenever kids who are already in the NHL go down for the World Juniors they suffer, they don't seem to play well at all. If they're NHL players playing in the NHL let them stay. It's a step down in competition.

[moon]

Originally Posted by T@T

I really get a kick out of this line of thinking, What's best? he's not a little physically immature pencil neck geek like RNH.If he's ready to play you let him play and learn to be better against the best players.

I wouldn't be against loaning him to the WJ's though.

So you just ignored the part where I said the 9 game start to the season would probably decide what is best?

If he shows he is clearly ready then he stays if it is close or he isn't then I think he should go down. In that statement there I am assuming with the team we have it is best that he goes down and comes up 1 whole year later.

[moon]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

I would, big time. Whenever kids who are already in the NHL go down for the World Juniors they suffer, they don't seem to play well at all. If they're NHL players playing in the NHL let them stay. It's a step down in competition.

Pietrangelo did fine in the WJHC and remaining junior season when he was sent by the Blues but he did only play 9 games for the Blues that year so it wasn't like he was a regular contributor to their team.

As much as I like the WJHC and want to see Canada with the strongest team possible I think if you are keeping a guy up in the NHL for the season then keep him on the NHL team. If he is going back to junior then sure send him to the WJHC.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by T@T

I really get a kick out of this line of thinking, What's best? he's not a little physically immature pencil neck geek like RNH.If he's ready to play you let him play and learn to be better against the best players.

I wouldn't be against loaning him to the WJ's though.

I get a kick out of this thinking. What's the rush? He's still a kid, the Flames will stink next year and unless he earns it and Hartley is committed to giving him top 6 ice time it's a waste of a season on multiple levels. We have ample evidence that rushing kids can hurt their development and there's simply no point in having him play 6-12 minutes a night in Calgary when he can play close to 20 minutes a night in junior. There's no need to stick this kid in the mess that will be the 2013/14 Calgary Flames and grow a losing culture like the Oilers have.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by moon

Pietrangelo did fine in the WJHC and remaining junior season when he was sent by the Blues but he did only play 9 games for the Blues that year so it wasn't like he was a regular contributor to their team.

As much as I like the WJHC and want to see Canada with the strongest team possible I think if you are keeping a guy up in the NHL for the season then keep him on the NHL team. If he is going back to junior then sure send him to the WJHC.

Yeah, I was talking about guy who go directly from the NHL to the World Juniors in December. More along the lines of Brett Connolly for the 2012 tournament.

edit, forgot Pietrangelo was still in the NHL, technically, at the time. Couldn't remember how that played out.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Then you have to look at the Flames. Is burning a year of ELC a good idea? Is the difference between third line center and the OHL domination worth that year of UFA coming earlier?

I don't know what's best for his development, but burning an ELC year is certainly a big deal. You get the best cap value out of guys who are on their ELCs. With the Flames being at the start of their rebuild, the longer you can hold off the UFA/non-ELC/non-arbitration years (if you can do it without negatively affecting development) the better.

[moon]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Yeah, I was talking about guy who go directly from the NHL to the World Juniors in December. More along the lines of Brett Connolly for the 2012 tournament.

edit, forgot Pietrangelo was still in the NHL, technically, at the time. Couldn't remember how that played out.

He spent a lot of time in the pressbox.

Even though it worked out for his development in the end I think they should have sent him back earlier and had him go to WJHC.

I agree that sending a guy to WJHC and then having him come back to the NHL is a horrible idea and having a guy go to WJHC and then back to junior is only slightly better.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by SebC

I don't know what's best for his development, but burning an ELC year is certainly a big deal. You get the best cap value out of guys who are on their ELCs. With the Flames being at the start of their rebuild, the longer you can hold off the UFA/non-ELC/non-arbitration years (if you can do it without negatively affecting development) the better.

The other way of looking at it is that you can potentially get players on cheaper second contracts if you burn through their ELC earlier in their career.

If the Oilers had put Eberle into the NHL at 19 for example they would have been looking at signing him to an extension coming off a 43 point season rather then a 76 point one.

If the Oilers had left Hall in junior for another year his extension would be signed coming off his current 50 points in 45 games rather then the 53 in 61 of two seasons ago.

In this case, burning up the ELC quickly worked out better for the Oilers on Hall, and delaying Eberle's arrival not so much.

If your team is not going to be a contender during the ELC window anyway, as a GM I would lean towards burning the ELC as quickly as possible if the player is ready for NHL duty.

[Fire]

You do what you feel is best for his development, not because of potential future earnings.