Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 07-09-2019, 06:49 PM   #21
dammage79
Franchise Player
 
dammage79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monahammer View Post
This might establish a better value for puljujarvi and the Oilers unfortunately.
Jokiharu and Kylington are close comparables. Henri 4 point more production at the NHL level in their 1st season but Oliver's better in the AHL. I wouldnt come close to trading Oliver for Poolparty. I'd do the next best D prospect we have though.
dammage79 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to dammage79 For This Useful Post:
Old 07-09-2019, 07:51 PM   #22
Jacks
Franchise Player
 
Jacks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Exp:
Default

The Keith contract wasn't that bad actually, only 1 year under 2M, nothing like the worst of the back diving contracts. The Hossa deal is a different story, obvious cap circumvention and never should have been approved in the first place.


.... but the Seabrook deal, yikes, that is a bloody disaster. If there are ever anymore compliance buyouts he's done.
Jacks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2019, 07:33 AM   #23
devo22
Franchise Player
 
devo22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Austria, NOT Australia
Exp:
Default

that's underwhelming for Chicago. Jokiharju had a really nice rookie season as a 19-year-old defenseman, don't get why they give up on him. Also thought he'd fetch more for sure.

but yeah, like others said: it's Chicago, so Nylander will probably kill it.
devo22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2019, 08:12 AM   #24
Hot_Flatus
First Line Centre
 
Hot_Flatus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Uranus
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen View Post
I don't think Buffalo gets enough discredit for these young guys. They're nearly as bad as Edmonton in developing.

Armia, Grigorenko, Girgensons, Zadorov, and Nylander have all been really big disappointments compared to expectations, even tempered expectations.

Ristolainen was looking like a future number 1 stud, but he stalled heavily. Reinhart, not a bad player especially last year, hasn't really lived up to his expectations though.

Too early to call on Mittelstadt.

Clear passes on Eichel and Dahlin but that's probably despite the Sabres.
Reinhart isn't really a bust or a failed player. If you watched him as a junior he was never going to blow you away with any one part of his game. He's just a solid player who can produce reasonably well at both ends of the ice.
__________________
I hate to tell you this, but I’ve just launched an air biscuit
Hot_Flatus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2019, 10:47 AM   #25
SeanCharles
Powerplay Quarterback
 
SeanCharles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by devo22 View Post
that's underwhelming for Chicago. Jokiharju had a really nice rookie season as a 19-year-old defenseman, don't get why they give up on him. Also thought he'd fetch more for sure.

but yeah, like others said: it's Chicago, so Nylander will probably kill it.
Keith
Gustafsson
Maatta
Seabrook
de Haan
Murphy

Koekkoek
Dahlstrom

Not really too surprising.
SeanCharles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2019, 11:44 AM   #26
Monahammer
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Monahammer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: St. Albert (Calgary-Jr.)
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dammage79 View Post
Jokiharu and Kylington are close comparables. Henri 4 point more production at the NHL level in their 1st season but Oliver's better in the AHL. I wouldnt come close to trading Oliver for Poolparty. I'd do the next best D prospect we have though.
Sort of what I was thinking- Kylington is too much for Jesse, but Jokiharu just went for Nylander so perhaps that's about where the value is league wide.

lol at our next best d prospect- who would that even be? Lerby? the russian? Can't really trade either of them as we just signed both. Our D prospect cupboard is actually pretty barren.
Monahammer is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Monahammer For This Useful Post:
Old 07-12-2019, 11:47 AM   #27
thefoss1957
First Line Centre
 
thefoss1957's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Chicago Native relocated to the stinking desert of Utah
Exp:
Default

I don't like the thought of trading a R shot 20 yo D-man for a Forward...I am not a fan of this deal.


As far as the 'Hawks success at drafting, besides Toews at #3 overall and Kane, the wins were in getting value in rounds 2 through 4, and doing a decent job of Euro scouting, to find undervalued gems like Panarin or Teravainen.


I will defend the Hossa contract, it was legal under the CBA at that time, and only after the 'Hawks won again, were ex post facto changes to the CBA made, to punish those kinds of contracts. In the US, ex post facto changes in law are routinely ruled unenforceable, and I would have been interested to see the NHL litigated for such targeted contract agreements.


But bottom line, about this trade, Bowman gave away a more valuable asset in a high round D-Man for no apparent reason.
__________________
They're always conniving and scheming. Sometimes they do both! I call that...Schenniving! - Sarge
thefoss1957 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2019, 11:51 AM   #28
Oling_Roachinen
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thefoss1957 View Post
I will defend the Hossa contract, it was legal under the CBA at that time
No it wasn't. It went against the spirit of the cap which was not allowed. It was not explicitly spelled out that it was 'illegal' but as we saw with Kovalchuk's contract and the ensuing punishment, that doesn't matter.
Oling_Roachinen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2019, 11:59 AM   #29
Ped
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Ontario
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen View Post
No it wasn't. It went against the spirit of the cap which was not allowed. It was not explicitly spelled out that it was 'illegal' but as we saw with Kovalchuk's contract and the ensuing punishment, that doesn't matter.

Sure but the initial Kovalchuk contract was disallowed. So if the Hossa/Luongo/whoever contracts were against the spirit they should have disallowed those ones too.
Ped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2019, 12:01 PM   #30
Oling_Roachinen
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Exp:
Default

Yeah, they probably should have stopped when Kripusoff's contract was submitted but they didn't and they kept allowing it to get worse. Doesn't mean that Hossa's contract was 'legal' anymore than Kovalchuk's initial one was despite not being explicitly banned by the CBA. What they were was lucky that the NHL decided to draw the line with Kovalchuk and not Hossa.
Oling_Roachinen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2019, 12:03 PM   #31
Ped
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Ontario
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen View Post
Yeah, they probably should have stopped when Kripusoff's contract was submitted but they didn't and they kept allowing it to get worse. Doesn't mean that Hossa's contract was 'legal' anymore than Kovalchuk's initial one was despite not being explicitly banned by the CBA. What they were was lucky that the NHL decided to draw the line with Kovalchuk and not Hossa.

Oh I agree, they were complete cap circumvention. I just think that by accepting them, the NHL said "okay" and shouldn't be allowed to punish teams after the fact.


If it's a good contract, allow it.


If you're going to say it's not, then say no.


I seem to recall someone (Ken Baumgartner, maybe) got a contract from the Leafs that included a PIM bonus and the league disallowed that one too.
Ped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2019, 12:08 PM   #32
The Cobra
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen View Post
No it wasn't. It went against the spirit of the cap which was not allowed. It was not explicitly spelled out that it was 'illegal' but as we saw with Kovalchuk's contract and the ensuing punishment, that doesn't matter.
Since the NHL approved it, it's hard to suggest it was against the spirit of the cap.
The Cobra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2019, 12:15 PM   #33
The Cobra
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thefoss1957 View Post
I don't like the thought of trading a R shot 20 yo D-man for a Forward...I am not a fan of this deal.


As far as the 'Hawks success at drafting, besides Toews at #3 overall and Kane, the wins were in getting value in rounds 2 through 4, and doing a decent job of Euro scouting, to find undervalued gems like Panarin or Teravainen.


I will defend the Hossa contract, it was legal under the CBA at that time, and only after the 'Hawks won again, were ex post facto changes to the CBA made, to punish those kinds of contracts. In the US, ex post facto changes in law are routinely ruled unenforceable, and I would have been interested to see the NHL litigated for such targeted contract agreements.


But bottom line, about this trade, Bowman gave away a more valuable asset in a high round D-Man for no apparent reason.
It's clear that the Hawks soured on Joker after watching him play.

Whether they are ultimately right or not, they certainly didn't view him as a 1-2 d-man in the making.

I think you'll see Nylander playing with Strome and Debrincat, since he can play his off wing. Bowman stressed that Nylander can do that, I think for a reason.

Like with most trades, time will tell.

Chicago showed you can pick up d-men relatively easy these days, it's top 6 forwards which seem to be in shorter supply. Calgary still needs one.
The Cobra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2019, 12:35 PM   #34
Monahammer
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Monahammer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: St. Albert (Calgary-Jr.)
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Cobra View Post
It's clear that the Hawks soured on Joker after watching him play.

Whether they are ultimately right or not, they certainly didn't view him as a 1-2 d-man in the making.

I think you'll see Nylander playing with Strome and Debrincat, since he can play his off wing. Bowman stressed that Nylander can do that, I think for a reason.

Like with most trades, time will tell.

Chicago showed you can pick up d-men relatively easy these days, it's top 6 forwards which seem to be in shorter supply. Calgary still needs one.
Yeah but it was opposite last offseason and D will likely become a more valuable commodity again next year. These things are cyclical, so I am not sure how much weight we should put into it... probably more useful to try and stick with player comparables than to try and measure value based on league "availability".
Monahammer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2019, 04:06 PM   #35
GreenLantern2814
Franchise Player
 
GreenLantern2814's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen View Post
Yeah, they probably should have stopped when Kripusoff's contract was submitted but they didn't and they kept allowing it to get worse. Doesn't mean that Hossa's contract was 'legal' anymore than Kovalchuk's initial one was despite not being explicitly banned by the CBA. What they were was lucky that the NHL decided to draw the line with Kovalchuk and not Hossa.
Kiprusoff's contract was the politest, most Canadian interpretation of cap circumvention the league has ever seen. A six year deal is actually a five year one.

It's positively quaint.
GreenLantern2814 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2019, 04:11 PM   #36
GreenLantern2814
Franchise Player
 
GreenLantern2814's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Exp:
Default

Duplicate
GreenLantern2814 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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 03:14 AM.

Calgary Flames
2017-18




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2016