[Trade] Wild trade Eric Staal to Buffalo for Marcus Johansson

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

What makes you say that? Looking at the list again:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina
I think organizational success is one of many factors that players consider. Others include:
- Tax environment: Better than roughly 1/2 of NHL Clubs
- Additional PR/marketing opportunities No doubt there are more of these in Canada, but Calgary is a secondary market at best
- Climate You got this one in the bag
- Size of city Calgary is a fairly large city comparatively in the NHL.
- Lifestyle of city Calgary is consistently ranked as having a very high quality of life
- Where the player is from These next four are all completely dependent per player, but given the proportion of Canadian players in the league I suspect that Calgary actually comes out favorably in many of these categories
- Where the players friends/family are
- What their partner/family wants
- Where their support structures are located

In summary, I don't see why many of these listed reasons actually put the flames at a disadvantage to, say, the Columbus Blue Jackets.
Maybe that's not being favorable though, even a California team like SJ:

Tax? No Alberta is better.
PR/ Marketing Opps? Not unless you're the undisputed best player on the team, and even then you are the 4th or even 5th market (Football, MLB, NBA, and now MLS supercedeing NHL.)
Climate: yep.
Size of City: sure but I am not sure that's of large benefit in this circumstance. Traffic is really the only result
Lifestyle of City: This one is really tricky IMO. Yes, there are definitely benefits to the california lifestyle, but the value of your dollar (even for a millionaire) is going to go MUCH farther in calgary than SJ. I guess it really depends what you're after!
Where the player is from/support/ friends and family: There are still very few players that originate in California, so I suspect Calgary would win this on balance.

Anyways. If you really put a lot of weight on Climate then it works. Some people do see it that way.

Having some quoting issues, but...
Tax - I don't know region by region where the advantages are, I just know there are some better tax states.

Population - Calgary is smaller than all but one U.S. NHL market, so it is among the smallest in the league. Not sure how we can say its comparatively large

PR/Marketing - important for star players who would want access to major media markets: LA, Chicago, NY, Toronto. Calgary falls short of those.

Lifestyle: Rankings of this are often based on general population. The fact is if you are wealthy places like NY, LA, Phoenix are awesome. I think Calgary has advantages too (safety, family environment, space, outdoor activities) so it really depends on what is important to someone. Are they at a stage where they want an active night lift, or safety/space for their family?

[Calgary4LIfe]

No, the Flames have not had the success that we as fans thought was going to happen. No, I am not 100% satisfied with the moves that Calgary did or didn't make at various times over the last 5 or even 30 years. No, I am not a huge fan of the owners themselves (at least one or more anyway).


With that being said, FFS, this organization is NOT the Edmonton Oilers, the Arizona Coyotes, the Florida Panthers, etc. This team goes out and spends to the cap, and then above that with buyouts and an expanded coaching staff including a higher-priced associate coach (with Peters - who was not bargain-bin, but rather a rip-off IMO), expanding the scouting staff, brought in higher priced trainers (didn't we get LA's head athletic trainer or something a few years ago?), etc.



This team doesn't seem overly shy to spend money. They aren't the Rangers. They aren't the Maple Leafs. Those teams make money hand over fist - Calgary does not. Calgary spends more than enough to 'make this team a contender', but it hasn't happened. Calgary is a stable franchise who isn't selling or rumoured to be selling every other year, firing GMs every other year, having a tonne of controversy or embarrassments, etc.


I am frustrated by the lack of changes that I personally wanted to see, but let's see what does happen first, and how this team performs. Sometimes changes that you don't like end up working out.



This team is not as successful as I would like it to be, but it is anything but a disaster either. This is coming from a frustrated fan here. I will be watching again next season eagerly to see how this team does, how individual players do, and how this team is trending. I will keep doing so and will only stop if this team eventually does become the embarrassment that Edmonton is. It is far from that.

[Scroopy Noopers]

I still have no idea what Minny was thinking here. Dealing him to a contender at the deadline seems like a much smarter play.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

I still have no idea what Minny was thinking here. Dealing him to a contender at the deadline seems like a much smarter play.

That is exactly what Staal's no trade list was designed to block.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

That is exactly what Staal's no trade list was designed to block.

Right, I forgot about that. But I thought those were due before a season began.

Either way, I still don’t get it.

[Red]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

What players were willing to come here? I only recall hearing Adrian Aucoin having to waive his NTC to come here. Other than that who are you talking about?

Let’s overpay first Cory Sarich give him 5x3.5 and a full NMC.

Jokinen coming back? Getting a washed up Tanguay back because we could promise him first line minutes?

Several players may have rejected a trade to the Flames back then. Twitter wasn’t even a thing for half of Sutter’s time here.

You proved zero evidence or proof the Flames were any more desirable in 2003-2010 than they have been in 2014-2020

It's an opinion, relax and stop searching for evidence and proof.
The Flames were a wasteland for years. Sutter came in, stopped the lame excuses like small market, cdn dollar etc and demended the team to play hard no matter what the payroll was. Got some success and the Flames weren't a bad place all of a sudden.

Treliving is in on every player but loses out because he feels it's too much assets or dollars. He is basically afraid to lose a trade or commit to a big contract. He keeps going after the diamonds in the rough or the secondary type players like Brouwer, Neal, Hamonic. He did well with Hamilton though, I will give him that.

I would like to see him change the image of the Flames. Get a top player and show that the Flames are not afraid to go for it. Other players will follow and we will stop hearing all this "he won't come to Calgary" talk. Sometimes I wonder if coming from Arizona got his priorities messed up. There he was in a survival mode. But here he needs to build a reputation of a winner at all costs. Like Sutter did.

[Red]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Sutter prioritized players who wanted to be here. So there's a self fulfilling prophecy there. Plus the Flames have spent to the cap consistently. Certainly they have shown signs that they are willing to spend to win. Unless this is just about the narrative that they won't spend on a top tier coach? That's just a single data point/element.

I think we are all making a ton of assumptions. And in your case I think you are projecting your feelings about the GM to assume that players also feel that way. That may be true, but we certainly don't know and how widespread that is.

The reality is that these decisions are highly personal to each person and family and trying to simplify down to over-arching or common themes, as we are trying to do in this thread, is just naive.

I do think there are markets that are highly attractive for reasons I outlined. Then you probably have a big bunch in the middle where it comes down to personal choice, and then a small number that are very unattractive.

But it's going to come down to what is important to each player and their families.

How did Tre show the willingness to spend? Was it Mark Stone trade, Bishop or Hall? None are here because he would rather get quantity over quality. He just couldn't pull the trigger.
Was ROR available to the Flames? Probably.

Treliving has a knack for missing out on top guys. And then he overpay for average or below guys to make up for it.

It's not a well managed team and players around the league can see it. We have 4th liners like Ryan and Lucic making huge $$$ but we won't pay Mark Stone.

Now, I know that not every deal works out, it takes two. But Treliving has yet to achieve even one of those miracles, bring a star player here. Hamilton was a great trade, but he was just a yound D with promise.

Time for Tre to make the Flames and Calgary relevant. He has failed so far.

[VladtheImpaler]

Just my opinion, but for the reasons set out by Jiri above, the Flames will never (well, I guess there are freak occurrences) succeed by being flashy, "going for it", splashing out on big contracts or big trades, etc. I think the only realistic path for a "small market" team is to be ruthless and efficient. Maximize every asset, don't overhold players, pour resources into drafting, development and analytics, never trade for "Hamonic", never sign anyone July 1-2, etc. In a cap world, you cannot outspend, and our market is at a fundamental disadvantage, so take advantage of the fact that most GMs are objectively not very smart, and most teams suffer from "short-termism". Even the Sharks, long a paragon of steady excellence wound up eating a shotgun. Much like in poker - you win the most when you go against the grain...

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Red

I would like to see him change the image of the Flames. Get a top player and show that the Flames are not afraid to go for it. Other players will follow and we will stop hearing all this "he won't come to Calgary" talk. Sometimes I wonder if coming from Arizona got his priorities messed up. There he was in a survival mode. But here he needs to build a reputation of a winner at all costs. Like Sutter did.

I just think you are comparing 2 different eras and we live in a time where even bottom pairing D are getting some form of trade protection.

You must be in support of getting Taylor Hall then as that would be the biggest UFA to ever sign in Calgary?

[Red]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

Just my opinion, but for the reasons set out by Jiri above, the Flames will never (well, I guess there are freak occurrences) succeed by being flashy, "going for it", splashing out on big contracts or big trades, etc. I think the only realistic path for a "small market" team is to be ruthless and efficient. Maximize every asset, don't overhold players, pour resources into drafting, development and analytics, never trade for "Hamonic", never sign anyone July 1-2, etc. In a cap world, you cannot outspend, and our market is at a fundamental disadvantage, so take advantage of the fact that most GMs are objectively not very smart, and most teams suffer from "short-termism". Even the Sharks, long a paragon of steady excellence wound up eating a shotgun. Much like in poker - you win the most when you go against the grain...

But this is exactly why we have a salary cap. We can be as flashy as anyone else.
It's all about money allocation. Cheap top players with expensive depth or expensive top end and cheap filler? Our top line is a bargain. No doubt. Goaltending is not, 2 mid rangers. The D? Not a bad deal, no huge contracts there. But what did that matter in the playoffs? We were left to rely on our expensive depth. Wasnt enough.
Not sure if there is a formula, but whatever Tre built is not working.

[Red]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

I just think you are comparing 2 different eras and we live in a time where even bottom pairing D are getting some form of trade protection.

You must be in support of getting Taylor Hall then as that would be the biggest UFA to ever sign in Calgary?

I'm in support of the Flames getting impact players, even if it appears expensive. Like the Stone deal or ROR. Both would be awesome.

Not a huge Hall fan. Would prefer a big C instead, even if it costs a lot more. A good C can make 2 cheap slugs produce so it's not a bad overall.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Red

But this is exactly why we have a salary cap. We can be as flashy as anyone else.

We can try, but because the Flames are where they are this a highly inefficient method. Dollars being equal, the vast majority of players will choose a more desirable destination. We can pay more, but even if that works, you are overpaying per unit of production, again putting you at a disadvantage vs competitors.
Instead of playing by the same formula as everyone else, where we cannot "win", use a different formula to take advantage of the market.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Red

I'm in support of the Flames getting impact players, even if it appears expensive. Like the Stone deal or ROR. Both would be awesome.

Not a huge Hall fan. Would prefer a big C instead, even if it costs a lot more. A good C can make 2 cheap slugs produce so it's not a bad overall.

ROR would have been a great deal. Stone would have been a rental only.

[Dragomir]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

No, the Flames have not had the success that we as fans thought was going to happen. No, I am not 100% satisfied with the moves that Calgary did or didn't make at various times over the last 5 or even 30 years. No, I am not a huge fan of the owners themselves (at least one or more anyway).


With that being said, FFS, this organization is NOT the Edmonton Oilers, the Arizona Coyotes, the Florida Panthers, etc. This team goes out and spends to the cap, and then above that with buyouts and an expanded coaching staff including a higher-priced associate coach (with Peters - who was not bargain-bin, but rather a rip-off IMO), expanding the scouting staff, brought in higher priced trainers (didn't we get LA's head athletic trainer or something a few years ago?), etc.



This team doesn't seem overly shy to spend money. They aren't the Rangers. They aren't the Maple Leafs. Those teams make money hand over fist - Calgary does not. Calgary spends more than enough to 'make this team a contender', but it hasn't happened. Calgary is a stable franchise who isn't selling or rumoured to be selling every other year, firing GMs every other year, having a tonne of controversy or embarrassments, etc.


I am frustrated by the lack of changes that I personally wanted to see, but let's see what does happen first, and how this team performs. Sometimes changes that you don't like end up working out.



This team is not as successful as I would like it to be, but it is anything but a disaster either. This is coming from a frustrated fan here. I will be watching again next season eagerly to see how this team does, how individual players do, and how this team is trending. I will keep doing so and will only stop if this team eventually does become the embarrassment that Edmonton is. It is far from that.

I’m not an Oilers fan but the cold hard reality is that in the last 13 years the Flames have the same amount of playoff round wins as the Oilers. It is THAT bad and honestly unreal.

[Red]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

ROR would have been a great deal. Stone would have been a rental only.

Stone said that he was gonna sign with whoever traded for him. Within reason of course. But seeing its Treliving, he would probably only offer a 5x7 deal so yes, a rental in the end

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Red

Stone said that he was gonna sign with whoever traded for him. Within reason of course. But seeing its Treliving, he would probably only offer a 5x7 deal so yes, a rental in the end

That’s completely untrue. Stone never said that, and, in fact, the fact he wasn’t going to re-sign in Calgary made the price way way too steep.

[Red]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

We can try, but because the Flames are where they are this a highly inefficient method. Dollars being equal, the vast majority of players will choose a more desirable destination. We can pay more, but even if that works, you are overpaying per unit of production, again putting you at a disadvantage vs competitors.
Instead of playing by the same formula as everyone else, where we cannot "win", use a different formula to take advantage of the market.

Then become a more desirable place. Not gonna do it by cheaping out. Flames need an image change.
And let's remember that not every desirable team has the cap room or assets to compete.
They were close a few times, just got the jitters in the end. Time and time again. Treliving is a tire kicker.

[GioforPM]

Friedman, at the time:

“ The other thing the Golden Knights held as an advantage was the feeling that if Stone was extending anywhere else at the deadline, it was in Nevada.”

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Friedman, at the time:

“ The other thing the Golden Knights held as an advantage was the feeling that if Stone was extending anywhere else at the deadline, it was in Nevada.”

Also

https://twitter.com/user/status/1302243489883750400

[Red]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

That’s completely untrue. Stone never said that, and, in fact, the fact he wasn’t going to re-sign in Calgary made the price way way too steep.

The fact? What fact are you referring to?
During the last stretch of that trade, Fan960 talked about Stone saying that we was gonna sign where ever the trade would take him. He wasn't fussy about where he was going to go, he just wanted a long term deal for stability.