[Trade] Stars acquire Ryan Hartman for Tyler Pitlick. UPD: Stars don't qualify Hartman

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by AC

I'd take Hartman here for sure.

Especially if we move Frolik and need more RW depth.

Wonder if Hartman would have chemistry with Bennett. Flames can use another player with some skill and grit! Can anyone comment on his skating?

[Heavy Jack]

I would love both Brett Ritchie and Hartman on this team for the sandpaper and grit plus the fact that they would fit in with the age of much of our core. Frolik + Brodie + Stone would all need to be moved without taking any salary back though.

Still this is both a heavy and quick lineup sans Neal who we would be hoping could bounce back

Gaudreau - Monahan - Lindholm
Tkachuk - Backlund - Neal
Bennett - Jankowski - Hartman
Mangiapane - Ryan - Ritchie
Hathaway/Czarnik

Giordano - Andersson
Hanifin - Hamonic
Valimaki - Yelesin
Kylington

Rittich
Talbot

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

Wonder if Hartman would have chemistry with Bennett. Flames can use another player with some skill and grit! Can anyone comment on his skating?

IIRC he's a good skater.

[442scotty]

Hartman is such an awesome player that he wasn’t even qualified...

[The Cobra]

I'm not sure what all the fuss is about a 4th liner who has been traded numerous times, seems to be quickly trending down, and wasn't even qualified.

He seems closer to be out of the NHL than contributing greatly to the bottom 6 of a Stanley Cup contending team.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by 442scotty

Hartman is such an awesome player that he wasn’t even qualified...

It's a bit of an odd situation, in this particular case. A guy who will be given more in arbitration than he's worth (and the team would be stuck with that contract because it would be less than $4.5M), but who can probably play a decent role on a team. So you don't qualify him because (a) the QO is too high and (b) you don't want to be stuck with a $2M contract, but a team would sign him for $1M and be very happy.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

It's a bit of an odd situation, in this particular case. A guy who will be given more in arbitration than he's worth (and the team would be stuck with that contract because it would be less than $4.5M), but who can probably play a decent role on a team. So you don't qualify him because (a) the QO is too high and (b) you don't want to be stuck with a $2M contract, but a team would sign him for $1M and be very happy.

Except he is now. UFA and can negotiate with any team.

And the team that traded for you didn’t qualify you. So, they want you perhaps, but only for less than your perceived FMV.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[cannon7]

He'll get what he would get in arbitration from some GM as a UFA.

[bob-loblaw]

I wonder if there could be any recourse against the Flyers for this.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by bob-loblaw

I wonder if there could be any recourse against the Flyers for this.

For what?

He went off the grid between the draft and July 1st - which is probably the busiest time in the NHL schedule.

I'm sure the Flyers contacted his agent and notified him of the trade, if Hartman isn't around to be contacted then there is really nothing the Flyers can do about it.

[Flames1217]

Strength is his issue if I remember correctly. He plays with heart and is not afraid to throw the body around but also gets knocked off the puck easily. He does have a good shot though.

Pretty sure Brad will look into Hartman as there is still some potential to be a good third liner.

Do not think he will ever be a top 6 forward but may be a solid addition to our bottom 6.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Except he is now. UFA and can negotiate with any team.

And the team that traded for you didn’t qualify you. So, they want you perhaps, but only for less than your perceived FMV.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think this is what I said, right? That he'd sign a lower contract than what an arbitrator might give him.

I think he could be a good value signing.

[PlayfulGenius]

Originally Posted by bob-loblaw

I wonder if there could be any recourse against the Flyers for this.

Hmm, interesting ... obviously very unlikely, based on the info we have, but perhaps there was a “not in good faith” element if the Flyers knew of the Stars intentions to sign before QO, while also knowing the player wasn’t around to be contacted???

Certainly a stretch, but who knows???

[Husky]

Hartman would be a good bottom 6 fit for the Flames.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Husky

Hartman would be a good bottom 6 fit for the Flames.

The Flames can be his 5th team in 2 years. That's a lot for a young player.

[bob-loblaw]

Originally Posted by PlayfulGenius

Hmm, interesting ... obviously very unlikely, based on the info we have, but perhaps there was a “not in good faith” element if the Flyers knew of the Stars intentions to sign before QO, while also knowing the player wasn’t around to be contacted???

Certainly a stretch, but who knows???

I watched a video of a trade call one time and they have a whole list of questions they go through. If I'm trading for him or rights I'd want to know if he was actually reached or reachable instead of his agent. I would like to confirm that they spoke and didn't just leave him a voice mail.

Who knows, it could be a similar but actual Feaster/ROR scenario if he jumps ship.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by bob-loblaw

I watched a video of a trade call one time and they have a whole list of questions they go through. If I'm trading for him or rights I'd want to know if he was actually reached or reachable instead of his agent. I would like to confirm that they spoke and didn't just leave him a voice mail.

Who knows, it could be a similar but actual Feaster/ROR scenario if he jumps ship.

I am not sure that Philly can or should be responsible.

But I do wonder what the rules are about being able to have a player report to the team while under contract. Hartman was a pending free agent, so technically under contract until July 1st and failed to report to the team that he was under contract to (the Stars).

While in Hartman's eyes, it might have seemed like he was "off duty" and could go off the grid, I wonder if there is anything in the contract that says that they have to report any time if summoned. Could Hartman be punished for failing to report?

Maybe Dallas could make a case with the league and NHLPA that either gives them more time to negotiate or even make Hartman forfeit his UFA status.

Just spit balling.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Failed to report to what? There’s no training camp in June. He didn’t fail to report to anything.

If they wanted more time to negotiate then they had to qualify him.

[FlamesAddiction]

I don't know. Are training camps the only reason why a team can ask a player to report while they are under contract, or can a team acquiring an asset under contract demand that they report for a medical evaluation or orientation?

I mean, why have contracts expire on July 1st if there are no obligations to the team once the season is done?

[Split98]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I am not sure that Philly can or should be responsible.

But I do wonder what the rules are about being able to have a player report to the team while under contract. Hartman was a pending free agent, so technically under contract until July 1st and failed to report to the team that he was under contract to (the Stars).

While in Hartman's eyes, it might have seemed like he was "off duty" and could go off the grid, I wonder if there is anything in the contract that says that they have to report any time if summoned. Could Hartman be punished for failing to report?

Maybe Dallas could make a case with the league and NHLPA that either gives them more time to negotiate or even make Hartman forfeit his UFA status.

Just spit balling.

This is the weirdest part to me - that he was "off duty" before his contract was done.

It's one thing to be traded unexpectedly and be off the grid, but I assumed that during these off-seasons players would be very much "on duty". Even if your agent is handling everything, I assumed that final "ok" came from the player with pen-to-paper.