Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 09-12-2017, 02:34 PM   #21
TheOnlyBilko
Crash and Bang Winger
 
TheOnlyBilko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Calgary via Palm Desert
Exp:
Default

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!


And I got BASHED by so many people on this forum when I said the Smith trade was awful and Calgary should have grabbed MAF.

TheOnlyBilko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 02:39 PM   #22
Jason14h
First Line Centre
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOnlyBilko View Post
HAHAHAHAHA!!!!


And I got BASHED by so many people on this forum when I said the Smith trade was awful and Calgary should have grabbed MAF.

What does this even mean/ have to do with anything? I'm so confused
Jason14h is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jason14h For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2017, 02:46 PM   #23
Enoch Root
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: May 2012
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOnlyBilko View Post
HAHAHAHAHA!!!!


And I got BASHED by so many people on this forum when I said the Smith trade was awful and Calgary should have grabbed MAF.

Well, I'm convinced now. Kudos.
Enoch Root is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 02:48 PM   #24
dammage79
Franchise Player
 
dammage79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Victoria
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOnlyBilko View Post
HAHAHAHAHA!!!!


And I got BASHED by so many people on this forum when I said the Smith trade was awful and Calgary should have grabbed MAF.


Goalie for goalie...maybe. but we are talking about a multitude of scenarios where the Flames would have been hurt by taking Fleury's full salary. Like AC said it likely would have cost the Hamonic trade. Or like I said, it would have cost Stone or Ferland or losing other players to make work. In reality, we have have Smith, Lack and Hamonic likely because of the retained salary from the Lack and Smith trades.
dammage79 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 02:49 PM   #25
GioforPM
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Springbank
Exp:
Default

"I think so" is important. I doubt that Fleury, being the guy he is, is going to diss a city without any reason. So when he's asked a hypothetical like that, what's he going to say "no - I'd never go to that dump"?
GioforPM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 02:50 PM   #26
dissentowner
Franchise Player
 
dissentowner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SW Ontario
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOnlyBilko View Post
HAHAHAHAHA!!!!


And I got BASHED by so many people on this forum when I said the Smith trade was awful and Calgary should have grabbed MAF.

So what has changed?
dissentowner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 02:59 PM   #27
TheOnlyBilko
Crash and Bang Winger
 
TheOnlyBilko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Calgary via Palm Desert
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil View Post
Probably not popular opinion, but I'd still take Fleury and his 115 playoff games over Smith's 19.

The team was good enough to get in with junk goaltending last season.


Yup I'm with you on this
TheOnlyBilko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 03:01 PM   #28
TheOnlyBilko
Crash and Bang Winger
 
TheOnlyBilko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Calgary via Palm Desert
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dissentowner View Post
So what has changed?
Because when the Smith trade was announced and even way before this (like during the 2016 draft) I had been saying Calgary should grab Fleury and multiple people told me Fleury would not come to Calgary
TheOnlyBilko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 03:03 PM   #29
TheOnlyBilko
Crash and Bang Winger
 
TheOnlyBilko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Calgary via Palm Desert
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dammage79 View Post
Goalie for goalie...maybe. but we are talking about a multitude of scenarios where the Flames would have been hurt by taking Fleury's full salary. Like AC said it likely would have cost the Hamonic trade. Or like I said, it would have cost Stone or Ferland or losing other players to make work. In reality, we have have Smith, Lack and Hamonic likely because of the retained salary from the Lack and Smith trades.
We have no idea what could have been worked out though. We could have still had Hamonic. There's players to be moved things to be done. But really it don't matter anymore, it's on Mike Smith now to prove his worth and it's all on Brad Treliving to prove he made the right move. We will see. I hope he did
TheOnlyBilko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 03:03 PM   #30
PeteMoss
Franchise Player
 
PeteMoss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: SW Ontario
Exp:
Default

Assuming it was at last year's trade deadline - could have made a big difference given how Elliott played in the playoffs.
PeteMoss is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to PeteMoss For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2017, 03:05 PM   #31
AC
Resident Videologist
 
AC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Even the playoff stats are funny. Fleury obviously has had a lot of playoff success on several iterations of stacked Penguins teams. Meanwhile Mike Smith made a big run with a PHX team in 2012, and also 3 games for Tampa earlier in his career.

Fleury's career playoff stats: .908, 2.65
Fleury 16/17 playoffs: .924, 2.56
Fleury 15/16 playoffs: .875, 3.04

Smith's career playoff stats: .945, 1.88
__________________
AC is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to AC For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2017, 03:14 PM   #32
PeteMoss
Franchise Player
 
PeteMoss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: SW Ontario
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AC View Post
I'm guessing a Fleury trade means we would have been out on Hamonic.

I think given the options of Fleury vs Hamonic + Smith, I'd take the current situation.

Fleury is coming off a 0.909 season on a Stanley Cup team, and Smith put up 0.914 on a team of garbage.
The Penguins gave Vegas a 2nd round pick to take Fleury and his contract instead of whoever else they exposed. Doubt it effects the Hamonic trade at all.
PeteMoss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 03:16 PM   #33
AC
Resident Videologist
 
AC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteMoss View Post
The Penguins gave Vegas a 2nd round pick to take Fleury and his contract instead of whoever else they exposed. Doubt it effects the Hamonic trade at all.
Sure, but they had to move Fleury at all costs by that point otherwise they'd lose Murray.

I'm sure the cost to any other team was significant. We've heard the Penguins wanted #6 (Tkachuk) for Fleury the year prior.
__________________
AC is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 03:28 PM   #34
Textcritic
Acerbic Cyberbully
 
Textcritic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: back in Chilliwack
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOnlyBilko View Post
We have no idea what could have been worked out though. We could have still had Hamonic. There's players to be moved things to be done.
I suppose this is principally true, but I am highly sceptical that even an astute GM like Treliving could have managed trades for both Hamonic and Fleury without a considerable sacrifice from this year's starting lineup.

After the Harmonic deal the Flames currently have:

2018 3rd, 4th x 2, 5th, 7th x 2
2019 1st, 4th x 2, 5th, 7th x 2
2020 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th.

The Flames traded a conditional 2018 2nd/3rd pick, a good prospect and Chad Johnson's negotiating rights for Mike Smith + $1.05 m retained.

Would Pittsburgh have been willing to move Fleury in exchange for a package of any of these remaining draft picks? Even if so, how many draft picks would the Flames be willing to move for Fleury? Bear in mind that they are already missing one first and two seconds in the next two years.

But moreover with the expansion draft looming what would Pittsburgh have wanted in exchange for MA Fleury? They traded a prospect, an 2017 second and a 2018 fourth to Vegas just to ensure that they would select Fleury in the expansion draft.

In the end, I am really quite convinced that the cost to acquire Fleury would have been higher than for Smith, to say nothing for the salary retained by Arizona in the deal. I am inter3ested to know given your confidence how YOU would have made a deal for MA Fleury without jeopardising available assets and necessary cap-space to acquire Hamonic.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls

Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
"The Lying Pen of Scribes" Ancient Manuscript Forgeries Project

Last edited by Textcritic; 09-12-2017 at 03:31 PM.
Textcritic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 03:33 PM   #35
Textcritic
Acerbic Cyberbully
 
Textcritic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: back in Chilliwack
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteMoss View Post
The Penguins gave Vegas a 2nd round pick to take Fleury and his contract instead of whoever else they exposed. Doubt it effects the Hamonic trade at all.
Fleury came with a $5.75 m cap hit. Mike Smith is costing the Flames $3.1875 m for each of the next two years.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls

Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
"The Lying Pen of Scribes" Ancient Manuscript Forgeries Project
Textcritic is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Textcritic For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2017, 04:05 PM   #36
dissentowner
Franchise Player
 
dissentowner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SW Ontario
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOnlyBilko View Post
Because when the Smith trade was announced and even way before this (like during the 2016 draft) I had been saying Calgary should grab Fleury and multiple people told me Fleury would not come to Calgary
Ah I see. Well I think we made out better this way anyhow. Fleury's numbers are garbage for a guy playing behind the most stacked team in the NHL for years. I am predicting his SV% this season will hover around .800
dissentowner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 04:21 PM   #37
Strange Brew
#1 Goaltender
 
Strange Brew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Exp:
Default

Offer Pittsburgh the Smith package and in addition they still keep the picks and prospect they gave to LV. But they would be out a different player in the expansion draft.

In the end this comes down to Treliving wanting Smith the player, not about the best deal and I'm sure the familiarity with Smith helped him make the decision. I hope he is right.
Strange Brew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2017, 02:49 AM   #38
TheOnlyBilko
Crash and Bang Winger
 
TheOnlyBilko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Calgary via Palm Desert
Exp:
Default

[QUOTE=PeteMoss;6370431]The Penguins gave Vegas a 2nd round pick to take Fleury and his contract instead of whoever else they exposed. Doubt it effects the Hamonic trade at all.[/QUOTEta I have no idea why it would have effected the Hamonic trade
TheOnlyBilko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2017, 03:04 AM   #39
AC
Resident Videologist
 
AC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOnlyBilko View Post
I have no idea why it would have effected the Hamonic trade
As mentioned, PIT previously asked for a 1st from Calgary for Fleury. So the assets spent to acquire Fleury would impact our ability to acquire Hamonic.

Also, Smith's caphit to Calgary gives us another $1.5M of cap space compared to Fleury's.
__________________
AC is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2017, 08:02 AM   #40
soulchoice
Powerplay Quarterback
 
soulchoice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Exp:
Default

His statements don't mean that much to be honest. It's a hypothetical question he's answering. Plus he is already with a new team. I wouldn't take too much solace in his answer. He has no reason to state otherwise at this juncture. There's nothing for him to gain by stating he wouldn't have waived his NTC.
soulchoice is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to soulchoice For This Useful Post:
Reply

Thread Tools

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 11:27 PM.

Calgary Flames
2017-18




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2016