UFA's- who's available this summer

[calgARI]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

As always, GMs are going to overpay like crazy.

I think Horton will get at least $6 million per season. He's an easy 60 point player and there are many comparables that would justify it.

I think in at least Horton's case, he is going to want to go somewhere where he will be a core player. He sort of was that in Florida but one of many good players in Boston. I could see him having interest in a long-term deal with a team that will have some exciting young players on it but will still make him part of their core.

[BigBird]

IMO Hortons career is on the downside ever since being knocked out by that Rome hit, if you go to the Bruins boards most want him on the 4th line and saying he's a lazy player.

[sa226]

I think the only tangible things we have to offer UFAs is money and opportunity.

The Jarome Iginla effect is gone. The Mikka Kipprusoff effect will be gone.

I think in the past despite results, potential signees still looked at our roster and saw talent and potential

We can't offer that stuff anymore.

[dissentowner]

I want Joey Crabb. Love that name.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by blankall

1) We're arguing about whether he should be bought out now. Him killing his value is hardly a worst case scenario, if the other alternative is buying him out.

2) Last time he was asked to kill penalties, he was in his offensive prime and had every right to be pissed. How long does an NHL player get to be in their prime for? On average, 5? 6 years? You've asked an established offensive player in his prime to take a secondary role killing penalties, and you're surprised he's asked for a trade? Tanguay was coming off 3 consecutive PPG+ seasons at that point.

Now that his stock has fallen considerably and he's well into his 30s, you're going to get a different reaction, if you ask Tanguay to take on a secondary role. He knows what happened to him after leaving the Flames, and he's well aware at age 33 that he's not the guy anymore.

3) I don't think Tanguay is all that complacent. He's just older and not as good as he was. Hence the 3.5 million contract, as oppossed to a 6.5 million contract, which would be fair if he was still that PPG+ guy. I understand the desire to clean house. But it's not as though Tanguay's presence is goign to somehow smother the rest of the team.

Yes it does!!


He would be okay if he was one of three small non-aggressive players the on the team that relied on skill. Like he was the first time he was here.


The Flames have Cammalleri, Hudler, Baertschi and Backlund that are not going to knock anyone over or dominate puck battles. If they are injured there is Stajan, Stempniak, Byron, Horak who play the same sort of game.

If we had Regehr, Phaneuf, Aucion, Pardy and Vandermeer on defense.... there might be room for one more skilled softer player.....


Brodie, Butler, Smith are not these sort of players..... when Gio was on the defense core above he was the softest of the defenseman.... now on the Flames he is the toughest..... He didn't grow 3 inches and/or pack on 20 pounds of muscle.

[gargamel]

I'm hoping that we ice a roster next season that's a mix of our young skill guys and a bunch of scrappy/goonish/pain in the ass free agents. Those guys can protect the talent and should be able to be had on short-term contracts, so it wouldn't tie us up for the future. I realize that we're probably not going to be very good, but I hope that we still manage to be a team that everyone else hates to play against.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

I understand that this is a glass half empty time for the Flames.... BUT

Glencross and Cammalleri and Hudler are top six forwards on basically any nhl team. If any one of them would have been traded the other team would be looking at them to fill a top 6 role. Backlund seems to be ready to move into a top 6 role.

Brodie Gio and Wideman likewise are top 4 d-men. .

I disagree with your assumption. Those are not top 6 forwards " on basically any team" and they are certainly not on a contending team.

The 3 D you mentioned are adequate to a little above average on a below average team . They are not top four on most contending teams .

If you disagree please show me where they would fit and who they would replace on some of the good teams.

Beacause these players look good sometimes with Calgary does top mean they are top 6 or top 3 on a contending or good team.

[kyuss275]

Anybody know where to get a list of the RFA II players? I have found a list of RFA players but it does not say which are RFA II

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by timbit

I disagree with your assumption. Those are not top 6 forwards " on basically any team" and they are certainly not on a contending team.

The 3 D you mentioned are adequate to a little above average on a below average team . They are not top four on most contending teams .

If you disagree please show me where they would fit and who they would replace on some of the good teams.

Beacause these players look good sometimes with Calgary does top mean they are top 6 or top 3 on a contending or good team.

I think Wideman and Giordano are both 2nd pairing d-men on a good/elite team. Unfortunately, Wideman and Giordano are our top 2 d-men.

Brodie is still a question mark - how much better will he get? It's unlikely he'll ever become a top pairing d-man, but he could very well could end up a damn fine 2nd pairing guy.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by timbit

I disagree with your assumption. Those are not top 6 forwards " on basically any team" and they are certainly not on a contending team.

The 3 D you mentioned are adequate to a little above average on a below average team . They are not top four on most contending teams .

If you disagree please show me where they would fit and who they would replace on some of the good teams.

Beacause these players look good sometimes with Calgary does top mean they are top 6 or top 3 on a contending or good team.

I think the top six and top 4 statement becomes a red herring because that implies some of them are too line and top pairing which they are not. We have a bunch of 4-6 forwards and a bunch of 3/4 defensemen. We are missing the top pairing and top line guys.

[Vulcan]

I am just not sure you can include "non Post-Apex" players into this, and/or there may indeed be value in such players. For instance, Jagr was definitely a good signing for Dallas - looks like they will probably get a 1st out of this, but at least a 2nd. At any rate, getting a good 'older' vet sometimes does provide a lot to a team full of youth. I will get flamed for saying this, but Regehr in my mind would be a good target. Sign him to a contract that puts him on the 3rd pairing. Though he has definitely regressed (thus 3rd pairing minutes + third pairing contract), he can very much serve like Warrener back in the day and help mentor our D prospects - well, at least if we intend to bring Breen up and use him as a shut-down physical guy. A bit of a long shot..

Just at the time there should be many "Post Apex" players available for cheap, we're going to ignore this supply. Sounds typical for this administration. On the plus side it should guarantee we are losers and draft high.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by timbit

I disagree with your assumption. Those are not top 6 forwards " on basically any team" and they are certainly not on a contending team.

The 3 D you mentioned are adequate to a little above average on a below average team . They are not top four on most contending teams .

If you disagree please show me where they would fit and who they would replace on some of the good teams.

Beacause these players look good sometimes with Calgary does top mean they are top 6 or top 3 on a contending or good team.

On the Hawks that are currently the class of the league their #5-6-7 forwards in TOI are Bolland Saad and Shaw.

Cammalleri and Hudler would obviously fit in ahead of these guys expect for Bolland. Glencross would compare well with Bolland.


On a pure hockey trade there would be no outrage if any of these top 6 players from the best team in the League got traded even up for one of the Flames top 6.

Keith and Seabrook are better than D than what the Flames have but Wideman and Gio for Haljmerson and Oduya ???? Not even close.

On The Hawks Brodie is not top 4.

Where the Hawks win out is that 5/6 Rozsinval and Leddy would each be in the Flames top 4.


The other elite team... the penguins ... currently has Sutter / Cooke as their # 6 forward.

Again Glencross fits in with these guys #6/7 guys..... Cammelleri and Hudler for the #5 guy Pasqual Dupuis???

on defense they brought in Murray to be their #4 replacing Letang..... Niskanen is also in their top 4.


Wideman and Gio clearly move into their top 4.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by BigBird

IMO Hortons career is on the downside ever since being knocked out by that Rome hit, if you go to the Bruins boards most want him on the 4th line and saying he's a lazy player.

I believe we refer to this as Post-Apex now. Stay away, Feaster.

[flames_fan_down_under]

Pretty slim pickings in the UFA market this offseason. However if the Chicago Blackhawks don't re-sign Viktor Stalberg I would be alright with Feaster making a big push for him. 22 goals last season and he's 27 years old.

Pierre-Marc Bouchard could be an OK pick up as well, he's generally a 50 point guy if he plays a full season.

[kyuss275]

Is Cal Clutterbuck a RFA II? If so i could see the flames doing an offer sheet for him. Bertuzzied could finally get his wish.

Same with Ryan McDonagh and Karl Alzner.

Also wonder if the flames could get Luke Adam on the cheap from Buffalo? They seem to have a lot of young centers above him on the depth chart.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

Anybody know where to get a list of the RFA II players? I have found a list of RFA players but it does not say which are RFA II

All RFAs are Group 2. Here are the current relevant groups in NHL free agency:

Group 2: Restricted Free Agents. All players on expired contracts who don't qualify for Group 3 or Group 6 status.

Group 3: Unrestricted Free Agents due to being 27 years old or having 7 years NHL experience

Group 6: Unrestricted Free Agents due to being 25 years old and not hitting the career games played threshold to maintain Group 2 status.


And then there are also draft related UFAs (basically undrafted players).

[blankall]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Yes it does!!


He would be okay if he was one of three small non-aggressive players the on the team that relied on skill. Like he was the first time he was here.


The Flames have Cammalleri, Hudler, Baertschi and Backlund that are not going to knock anyone over or dominate puck battles. If they are injured there is Stajan, Stempniak, Byron, Horak who play the same sort of game.

If we had Regehr, Phaneuf, Aucion, Pardy and Vandermeer on defense.... there might be room for one more skilled softer player.....


Brodie, Butler, Smith are not these sort of players..... when Gio was on the defense core above he was the softest of the defenseman.... now on the Flames he is the toughest..... He didn't grow 3 inches and/or pack on 20 pounds of muscle.

Tanguay is actually 6' tall and a just under 200 lbs. He's also not that soft and does throw some decent hits. Backlund is also 6' tall and just under 200lbs and despite the fact he is young and still developing strength, does a pretty good job of getting into the corners and winning battles. Hudler is short but stocky and plays an aggressive style of game. Hudler is a player known for winning puck battles and scoring from dirty places, particularly within a few feet of the net.

You're just randomly calling all of our playes who are European or French small and soft. Tanguay's physical game is pretty average amongst top line NHL forwards. I don't know where he gets this reputation of being on the soft side. No he's not Milan Lucic but holding him responsible for dragging the entire toughness of the team down is pretty ridiculous.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

On the Hawks that are currently the class of the league their #5-6-7 forwards in TOI are Bolland Saad and Shaw.

Cammalleri and Hudler would obviously fit in ahead of these guys expect for Bolland. Glencross would compare well with Bolland.


On a pure hockey trade there would be no outrage if any of these top 6 players from the best team in the League got traded even up for one of the Flames top 6.

Keith and Seabrook are better than D than what the Flames have but Wideman and Gio for Haljmerson and Oduya ???? Not even close.

On The Hawks Brodie is not top 4.

Where the Hawks win out is that 5/6 Rozsinval and Leddy would each be in the Flames top 4.


The other elite team... the penguins ... currently has Sutter / Cooke as their # 6 forward.

Again Glencross fits in with these guys #6/7 guys..... Cammelleri and Hudler for the #5 guy Pasqual Dupuis???

on defense they brought in Murray to be their #4 replacing Letang..... Niskanen is also in their top 4.


Wideman and Gio clearly move into their top 4.

I will repond with the REAL top 6 forwards of the Blackhawks.

Toews, Kane, Hossa, Sharp, Saad, Bolland.

Yes there would be real outrage if any Flame forward could supplant any of those 6.

...And the REAL top 6 forwards of the Pens.

Crosby Malkin Neal Kunitz Dupuis Iginla (Sutter).

The Pens would NEVER trade for any of those Flames forwards you mentioned . They possess chemistry and good cap hits

The REAL Hawks top 4 D are

Keith, Seabrook Oduya and Leddy.

The Hawks would not trade Leddy and Oduya (Haljmerson) for Giordano and Wideman EVER, just on Talent alone. Cap hits? Forget it.

The REAL Top 4 D on Pittsburgh are

Letang Orpik Martin Niskanin with one of the best young D in the League in Dupres rounding into form.

Giordano and Wideman? Cmon.

[Jake]

I hope the Flames do not spend much cap space on UFAs this summer. The market just isn't great this year in terms of higher end talent. I'd rather the team be patient and wait a year or two in order to use their cap space on better players.

The top scoring UFAs this season, according to cap geek, are almost all over 33 years old, AKA "post-apex". There are a few youngish centres available (Filppula, Bozak, Roy), and they would fill a big need, but none of them really make the Flames any "tougher". The Flames should leave a few roster spots for abrasive, difficult to play against players. I wouldn't mind signing Filppula or Roy (no Bozak/over rated Leafs again), but not both.

If there is one UFA I'd really like to see the Flames add, it is David Clarkson. He plays RW, which is a weak spot with Iginla gone, and plays with intensity.

There are no good D available in the age range the Flames should target.

[l33t_hax0r]

Based on the "apex" talk, newfound cap space, the available UFA crop and the desperate need for help at C, I think there's a good chance we overpay for Bozak. Former NCAA player may be a draw for Calgary as well?