Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > Fire on Ice: The Calgary Flames Forum
Register Forum Rules FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-26-2018, 01:56 PM   #241
Geeoff
Franchise Player
 
Geeoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Exp:
Default

Brad seems fed up with these arbitration cases and Hathaway seems like the perfect guy to ship out of town to set an example, since he's the worst player of the arbitration crew.
Geeoff is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Geeoff For This Useful Post:
Old 07-26-2018, 01:58 PM   #242
Jay Random
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Royle9 View Post
Would be... but I don't think the Flames want to go into next season with little to no cap space left available..

If someone goes down and we need to sign another backup goalie or something we could be in trouble.
That's another issue entirely, and I agree with you about it.

But CaptainCrunch was talking entirely about cap issues for the 2019-20 season and beyond. That problem does not require Brouwer to be bought out this summer.
__________________
WARNING: The preceding message may not have been processed in a sarcasm-free facility.
Jay Random is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2018, 02:37 PM   #243
FlamesFanTrev
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch View Post
I think that no matter what Brouwer gets bought out this year.



The Flames run into a serious cap crunch next year with Bennett, MT needing new deals so that probably will add 7 or 8 million bucks to the payroll and the year after that we lose half of the blueline.
Yep, the flames need some ELC players to step up big time this year for sure. If there is a Seattle expansion, we can bet on losing someone we like as well, so possibly ~ 5 mil there if it's Neal or Lindholm. The flames will be up against the cap for the foreseeable future though.
FlamesFanTrev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2018, 03:18 PM   #244
442scotty
First Line Centre
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geeoff View Post
Brad seems fed up with these arbitration cases and Hathaway seems like the perfect guy to ship out of town to set an example, since he's the worst player of the arbitration crew.
What on earth was Treliving thinking when he qualified Hathaway???? Pretty sure he's never going to suit up again at the NHL level for the Flames....
442scotty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2018, 03:27 PM   #245
Geeoff
Franchise Player
 
Geeoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 442scotty View Post
What on earth was Treliving thinking when he qualified Hathaway???? Pretty sure he's never going to suit up again at the NHL level for the Flames....
I think he was thinking that Hathaway would accept the qualifying offer instead of filing for arbitration LOL.

I think he's not a bad option as a 13th forward or injury call-up, since he brings a lot of energy and has some chemistry with Jankowski.
Geeoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2018, 03:30 PM   #246
Toonage
Taking a while to get to 5000
 
Toonage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Exp:
Default

He's a popular teammate as well. Doesn't hurt to have him around even if he's just sitting in the press box most nights.
Toonage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2018, 03:33 PM   #247
GioforPM
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Springbank
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 442scotty View Post
What on earth was Treliving thinking when he qualified Hathaway???? Pretty sure he's never going to suit up again at the NHL level for the Flames....
I think he's a pretty easy choice to sit as a 13th guy as opposed to Foo, Klimchuk, Mangiapane or Dube, who need to play. Really, his competition is Lazar, who is quicker, can play C if need be, has a little more consistent energy IMO and had only one less point (with more games but way less ice time and worse linemates).
GioforPM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2018, 03:33 PM   #248
Robbob
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Exp:
Default

Hathaway type players are a dime a dozen. To be honest, if you have Hathaway playing higher than a 13th forward consistently, than your team is in trouble. He more than Kulak needs to make sure he has the right number or he may not be long for Flames colours.
Robbob is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Robbob For This Useful Post:
Old 07-26-2018, 04:10 PM   #249
Flames Draft Watcher
In the Sin Bin
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 442scotty View Post
What on earth was Treliving thinking when he qualified Hathaway???? Pretty sure he's never going to suit up again at the NHL level for the Flames....
Strange viewpoint. Personally I think he's an ideal 13th or 14th forward. You can sub him in for energy and hitting and you're not worried about his development being stagnated by sitting unlike a younger player with a higher upside. He would probably take sitting out a lot better than Brouwer. And I'd rather play and develop guys like Lazar.
Flames Draft Watcher is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Flames Draft Watcher For This Useful Post:
Old 07-26-2018, 04:53 PM   #250
Scroopy Noopers
Pent-up
 
Scroopy Noopers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Plutanamo Bay.
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbob View Post
Hathaway type players are a dime a dozen. To be honest, if you have Hathaway playing higher than a 13th forward consistently, than your team is in trouble. He more than Kulak needs to make sure he has the right number or he may not be long for Flames colours.
You don’t have him higher than 13. He is 13. A guy who doesn’t mind sitting in the press box, the team doesn’t need to develop him (he is what he is), and he can step in and play NHL minutes at the drop of a hat if needed. You need that.
Scroopy Noopers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2018, 05:29 PM   #251
gamesaver
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by the2bears View Post
He didn't make anything "public", this is just a rather vague comment directed at no one in particular.

As for a "precedent"? For what? This doesn't suddenly change negotiating tactics next year. Agents know that, they'd be laughed out of the room if they brought this up.

I think you're worrying for nothing.
I got to admit you are right in a way. Not such a big deal. But if GM is using the bad year as leverage for keeping salaries low, agents have all rights to do the opposite after good season. Pretty sure NHLPA would agree with me. I would say its fair.
gamesaver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2018, 07:28 PM   #252
sureLoss
Some kinda newsbreaker!
 
sureLoss's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Learning Phaneufs skating style
Exp:
Default

Kind of interesting we haven't seen the Flames put Hathaway on waivers yet.

Written submissions for arbitration are to be submitted 48 hours before the hearing. Assuming a 9am ET hearing on July 30th, Hathaway would have had to have been on waivers today to clear before the Flames had to submit their briefs 9am ET on July 28th. If they put him on waivers tomorrow, he wouldn't clear or be claimed until 12 PM ET July 28th. We saw with Kulak the Flames put him on waivers two days before the briefs for his hearing were due.

Could mean one or a combination of the following:

a) Flames and Hathaway are close to a deal or already have agreed to deal. The two sides are not that far apart and waivers are not needed.

b) Hathaway already cleared waivers early on in the 17/18 season and the Flames believe that is enough to undermine his case.

c) Hearing is set for 2pm ET on July 30th, meaning the Flames could put him on waivers tomorrow and complete the waiver process in time for their briefs due at 2pm ET on July 28th.

Last edited by sureLoss; 07-26-2018 at 08:39 PM.
sureLoss is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to sureLoss For This Useful Post:
Old 07-26-2018, 07:34 PM   #253
the2bears
Franchise Player
 
the2bears's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Bay Area
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gamesaver View Post
I got to admit you are right in a way. Not such a big deal. But if GM is using the bad year as leverage for keeping salaries low, agents have all rights to do the opposite after good season. Pretty sure NHLPA would agree with me. I would say its fair.
It's a negotiation, of course both sides will try to use whatever evidence and logic they can think of. But this did not introduce something new to the equation, which you seem to think is the case.

Just because the agent can mention a good season, and reference Tre's comments, does *not* mean they've suddenly gained an advantage. Tre's not going to say, "Good point, hadn't thought of that, so here's some more money."
the2bears is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2018, 07:48 PM   #254
Fire
Franchise Player
 
Fire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Calgary, AB
Exp:
Default

I don't think Treliving is too concern about the amount Hathaway will get. The high side would be $800k. No chance he makes >$1 million.
__________________

Fire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2018, 08:29 PM   #255
getbak
Franchise Player
 
getbak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sureLoss View Post
Could mean one or a combination of the following:

a) Flames and Hathaway are close to a deal or already have agreed to deal. The two sides are not that far apart and waivers are not needed.

b) Hathaway already cleared waivers early on in the 17/18 season and the Flames believe that is enough to undermine his case.

c) Hearing is set for 2pm ET on July 30th, meaning the Flames could put him on waivers tomorrow and complete the waiver process in time for their briefs due at 2pm ET on July 28th.
I'm guessing it's B. He not only cleared waivers last year, he played games in the AHL too. It seems like a pretty easy case for a two-way deal.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
getbak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2018, 10:07 PM   #256
MarkGio
First Line Centre
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AC View Post
$5,338,290 if it's Rittich up with the Flames instead of Gillies.
Aren't teams allowed to exceed the cap in the off season by a certain percentage? They only need to be cap compliant come season opener?
MarkGio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2018, 01:09 AM   #257
getoverit
Scoring Winger
 
getoverit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Exp:
Default

Correct!
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkGio View Post
Aren't teams allowed to exceed the cap in the off season by a certain percentage? They only need to be cap compliant come season opener?
getoverit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2018, 10:42 AM   #258
AC
Resident Videologist
 
AC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

@reporterchris: Garnet Hathaway/Calgary Flames salary arbitration filings

Player ask: $975,000
Team offer: $650,000

Hearing is scheduled for Monday.

https://twitter.com/reporterchris/st...46856770338816


So expect an $812,500 contract?
AC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2018, 10:43 AM   #259
AC
Resident Videologist
 
AC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

@reporterchris: Both are on one-year, one-way deals.

https://twitter.com/reporterchris/st...47252645601280
AC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2018, 11:11 AM   #260
GranteedEV
Franchise Player
 
GranteedEV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

That team offer is way too high. Hathaway is a plug. I don't even want him on my fourth line if a guy like Lazar or Foo is available.
__________________

"May those who accept their fate find happiness. May those who defy it find glory."
GranteedEV is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to GranteedEV For This Useful Post:
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:36 AM.

Calgary Flames
2023-24




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021