[Signing] Flames sign Erik Gudbranson (1 yr, $1.95 mil)

[PuckFather]

Your GM can't get help himself signing ex-Canucks players eh?

[Mass_nerder]

How is he getting paid 1.2 million more than Stone??

[Strange Brew]

Earlier this week we signed a guy to a 2 year, one way deal. And immediately bump him two slots down the depth chart so that absent a move, someone is earning an NHL salary in the A.

It’s not my money but someone explain to me how that is evidence of a coherent plan?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

I knew Treliving was a bad GM after his repeated terrible FA signings and complete inaction to address the scoring issues for 2+ years, but these recent moves (Richardson, Stone and Gudbranson) put him squarely in the worst GM in the league position.

The Flames are in BIG trouble for the foreseeable future with this guy running the show.

Why do you keep repeating the sub bury level signings as an issue? They're not.

Stone and Richardson are not and will not be a problem in any way.

Gudbranson at $2M however? No clue what they're thinking there. Hard no for me.

[Jacks]

Well at least we're pretty much capped out now so there shouldn't be anymore of these signings.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Mass_nerder

How is he getting paid 1.2 million more than Stone??

...and yes, they all suck.

[devo22]

I wonder how these negotations went. Like, what kind of leverage does Erik frigging Gudbranson have to get the Flames to shell out almost 2 million? Madness.

[Moneyhands23]

Originally Posted by devo22

I wonder how these negotations went. Like, what kind of leverage does Erik frigging Gudbranson have to get the Flames to shell out almost 2 million? Madness.

Yup. Very embarrassing

[PeteMoss]

Hate the salary but its 1 year and hopefully he's benched often so won't get over riled up.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Why do you keep repeating the sub bury level signings as an issue? They're not.

Stone and Richardson are not and will not be a problem in any way.

Gudbranson at $2M however? No clue what they're thinking there. Hard no for me.

They are ai problem if they are the best players you can trot out on the ice and they’re not very good.

Was Rinaldo an issue last year? I sure thought he was, every single shift he was on the ice. A bigger problem than your top line getting caved in? No.

[talladega.25]

We couldn't have landed Vatanen at that price?

[Larry David]

I mean, he may not be wrong?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Toonage]

Unless the plan was to
A) keep the pick to use in landing a big fish or
B) Know you aren't going to be any good and want to keep it for potential lottery purposes

I'd still let Gio walk, but this isn't how I would spend the cap

[getoverit]

Except we need our first for forward acquisition. We’re not done yet

Originally Posted by Larry David

I mean, he may not be wrong?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DJones]

But then we lost a first

Gio is gonna be 38, giving up a first for him would be foolish. Was anyone thinking that the 3rd was what was holding the Flames back?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

They are ai problem if they are the best players you can trot out on the ice and they’re not very good.

Was Rinaldo an issue last year? I sure thought he was, every single shift he was on the ice. A bigger problem than your top line getting caved in? No.

If said player is in the way of a promising prospect then he's not in the way because his contract can be buried. It's a simple insurance policy.

If you want to change the topic to the fact that there likely isn't a forward or dman that will kick the door down then fine.

If you want to change the topic to the fact that the upper roster (core) isn't all that good, then fine.

But adding a guy that can be waived and not effect your cap is the last thing anyone should be complaining about.

[Wastedyouth]

I can't quite definitively say it quiiiiiiiiiiite yet, but, Treliving might not be so good at this GMing thing....

[Coach]

Okay you know. I really was having a little optimism that this group of team builders were at least trying to do things right. Sometimes missing or failing, but trying.

This is a terrible use of cap space and roster spot.

[Jimdon]

Originally Posted by Larry David

I mean, he may not be wrong?

How about accepting the reality that with or without gio this team needs a huge shakeup and possibly a rebuild and neither spend assets to keep gio or spend our cap dollars on players that don't make us better?

[The Cobra]

If we were going to give $2M to a crappy dman, it should at least be a crappy offensive dman who can man the PP.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk