[Signing] Flames sign Michael Stone to 1 year deal ($700k)

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Weird. I am surprised that the Flames don’t use direct deposit.

What makes you think they don't?

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Surprised Stone couldn't get more from, say, Edmonton.

I choose to imagine that he could have. It's funnier that way.

[bubbsy]

But why??

[midniteowl]

People need to look at this signing differently, it's not $1.8M for a 7th defenseman. It's $700k for a 7th defenseman. If the Flames sign some defenseman other than Stone with $700K, we would not have lump the $700K with Stone's buy out cost, because that cost is already spent. So, you might not see Stone is worth the $1.8M but he's certainly worth $700k.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by midniteowl

People need to look at this signing differently, it's not $1.8M for a 7th defenseman. It's $700k for a 7th defenseman. If the Flames sign some defenseman other than Stone with $700K, we would not have lump the $700K with Stone's buy out cost, because that cost is already spent. So, you might not see Stone is worth the $1.8M but he's certainly worth $700k.

It could be $700K for a #6 D-man too, and that'd be solid value.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by midniteowl

People need to look at this signing differently, it's not $1.8M for a 7th defenseman. It's $700k for a 7th defenseman. If the Flames sign some defenseman other than Stone with $700K, we would not have lump the $700K with Stone's buy out cost, because that cost is already spent. So, you might not see Stone is worth the $1.8M but he's certainly worth $700k.

Oh, I know. But my point was, even at $1.8, for a guy of Stone's versatility and experience, it's not a huge overpay.

Or, looking at it another way, he was paid $3.5. He's now being paid $1.8 to do the exact same job. It's as if he retired and then re-signed for that amount (not allowed any more IIRC).

ETA: There are probably no other players that can handle the role of 7th man on the Flames better. The guy already knows systems and staff, and all the other players. And he's experienced enough that he doesn't need game in/game out minutes to stay sharp.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by mrdonkey

I can’t speak for anyone else, but I owe him an apology.

I was dead wrong, and I’m thankful you were willing to share your inside knowledge even though many (including myself) grilled you for it. I’m sorry. I hope my actions don’t dissuade you from sharing what you can in the future, even though no one could blame you if you didn’t.

Edit: this goes out to EverfresH15

Kudos.

I hope every poster who crapped on him after he shared inside info with us is filling up his inbox with apologies.

[GioforPM]

I didn't attack him or comment at all, but I was convinced by the posters who said it was offside the CBA. I didn't double check the CBA. Though I suppose even he could have double checked and said it wasn't the case for normal buyouts.

Anyway, bygones.

[Enoch Root]

There is no downside here. $700k, for a guy that is a known commodity with respect to being able to play in the NHL, is a great deal. And for a price that is as little, or less, than any of the other depth candidates.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

What makes you think they don't?

It is a joke. Read Ryan Pike’s tweet.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

You think Brodie would be traded for nothing?

Do you think we’d trade Brodie’s contract for one that’s equal or more expensive?

[KevinKlineReadingABook]

Originally Posted by mrdonkey

I can’t speak for anyone else, but I owe him an apology.

I was dead wrong, and I’m thankful you were willing to share your inside knowledge even though many (including myself) grilled you for it. I’m sorry. I hope my actions don’t dissuade you from sharing what you can in the future, even though no one could blame you if you didn’t.

Edit: this goes out to EverfresH15

I second this. I was one of those posters. I'm sorry about that EverfresH15. My bad.

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I didn't attack him or comment at all, but I was convinced by the posters who said it was offside the CBA. I didn't double check the CBA. Though I suppose even he could have double checked and said it wasn't the case for normal buyouts.

Anyway, bygones.

The whole situation was complicated by the Brooks Orpik situation the year before. In that case, Washington had traded Orpik to Colorado and they bought him out before Washington brought him back, and I think everyone just assumed that's how that sort of process would work.

This is virtually unprecedented, as far as I know. To quote J. Jonah Jameson:

"EverfresH15 was a hero—I just couldn't see it."

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Flamenspiel

I suppose they could do this for Frolik as well, unless someone picks him up for more money.

Not as far as I understand

If I understand correctly, there are 2 buyout windows. First one is in June and closes before free agency opens July 1.

Then there is a second window where a club can execute a buyout if they have arbitration hearings, with the rationale being to help the ability of the club to be cap compliant

The Flames had a buyout window open which was tied to arbitration dates (which were Sam Bennett (July 27th), David Rittich (July 29th), Ryan Lomberg (August 1st), and Rinat Valiev (August 4th))

I believe the Stone buyout was announced August 2.

So the Flames just can’t go buying everyone out willy nilly up and down the roster

[TheScorpion]

In addition, the Flames are limited by a set number of August second-period buyouts they can make over the course of the current CBA. They've made two so far and only have room for one more—but as DeluxeMoustache stated, that buyout window passed long ago.

Boy this has been a great summer for learning about some of the minutiae of the business.

[Diemenz]

I was one of those posters as well, and was dead wrong in my understanding of the CBA and also in believing that several broadcasters had a firm grasp of the CBA.

I offer my apology relentlessly.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Do you think we’d trade Brodie’s contract for one that’s equal or more expensive?

I think that is likely.

When he was traded to TO in the summer it appears to have been in a deal that provided virtually no cap relief. In fact, Brodie's a valuable player, who would need to return a valuable player were he to be traded. The Flames are not simply going to move him for nothing—especially not after Valimaki was placed on LTIR.

[Superfraggle]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Moving out a $4M contract has no impact on cap space?

I read your post a little too quickly. When you said

"My initial thoughts on this:
- Need to free space now to accommodate about-to-be-official Tkaclutch signing"

I thought you meant that signing Stone for $700k caused us to need to free more cap space. Didn't connect that first bullet with the subsequent ones.

I see what you were talking about now.

[Reggie Dunlop]

This has been one of the more unusual Flames off-seasons.

[Harry Lime]

This makes everything going forward over the next few days very interesting. The problem is, even if Brodie is back in play, there are no teams available that have a combination of a need for such a player and the cap space to make such a trade happen.

Going back to the summer and rumours about who was available, the only name that matches a team that can use Brodie, is Ehlers.

And the only way that a trade can occur between Winnipeg and Calgary is if a third team is involved to take some of the cap hit. The only three teams that have this ability is Detroit, LA or Ottawa, just glancing quickly. But how much would solving both Winnipeg's and Calgary's cap troubles cost?

Calgary ---> Ehlers
Winnipeg ---> Frolik and Brodie
Detriot ---> 4M cap hit for this year from Frolik and Brodie + two 2nd rd picks (one from each team)

Potential win win win, and everyone's cap problems are solved with Detroit reloading.

Dum dumdee dum dum.