Armchair GM 2024-25 Season, Craig Conroy's Can Do Calgary Flames

[Darth Vladar]

Weird, I think that Chychrun contract makes it far more likely that Ras gets 9M, or at least nearby. Over the last 3 seasons combined they have a total points difference of 2, and a total powerplay points difference of 1. Maybe recency bias will have some factor but not nearly as much as people think. Not to mention Rasmus is a right handed shot defenseman which is generally viewed as more of a premium on the market. I think it will depend on what guys like Dobson, Bouchard, and Ekblad get this summer. The first 2 will probably both get over 9M but the 3rd I will be shocked if he gets less than 8M unless he takes a discount to stay in Florida

It’s worth noting that Chychrun’s point totals over the past three years would have been in 30 fewer games, but all your points still stand. I just think if Conny were to re-sign Raz to an extension on the heels of this season he’d probably get a far better bargain than if Razzy were to bounce back with a monster season just because it’s the last one of his current contract, only for his game to fall off the edge of a cliff in year three of a new deal. Committing six or eight years to a guy who has shown signs of possible regression, with no fewer than three stud RHD’s in the system, at least one of whom will be given every opportunity to make the team out of camp next season. It’s like, why not get a 2026 1st for another shot at Gav Mac? Or at least finagle a similar haul like the one we got for Lindy? Don’t get me wrong, I love Raz, I love that he wants to be in Calgary, and I could honestly see us rolling with a Bahl-Raz/Parekh-Weegs top-four at least for the foreseeable, but it will really all boil down to WHEN the deal is signed, HOW MUCH the deal is for and for HOW LONG. I’d probably be down for eight years at say, a team-friendly $6M per, but even with all of our cap space and with the league cap itself going up, there are still a bunch of other contracts to consider.

 

[Lunatik]

It’s worth noting that Chychrun’s point totals over the past three years would have been in 30 fewer games, but all your points still stand. I just think if Conny were to re-sign Raz to an extension on the heels of this season he’d probably get a far better bargain than if Razzy were to bounce back with a monster season just because it’s the last one of his current contract, only for his game to fall off the edge of a cliff in year three of a new deal. Committing six or eight years to a guy who has shown signs of possible regression, with no fewer than three stud RHD’s in the system, at least one of whom will be given every opportunity to make the team out of camp next season. It’s like, why not get a 2026 1st for another shot at Gav Mac? Or at least finagle a similar haul like the one we got for Lindy? Don’t get me wrong, I love Raz, I love that he wants to be in Calgary, and I could honestly see us rolling with a Bahl-Raz/Parekh-Weegs top-four at least for the foreseeable, but it will really all boil down to WHEN the deal is signed, HOW MUCH the deal is for and for HOW LONG. I’d probably be down for eight years at say, a team-friendly $6M per, but even with all of our cap space and with the league cap itself going up, there are still a bunch of other contracts to consider.

I really don't think Ras is regressing, I think he's playing in a role over his head and it's hurting him statistically. He's being used as a #1, he's not a #1. Against top lines he doesn't see as much offensive zone time as he used to

 

[Bounces R Way]

Not sure how many people are watching the youtube series The Chase the team is putting out but it's very clear Ras is a big part of the leadership group in the room. Probably the most vocal anyway. If he wants to be here I think he'll be here.

He's also not having a great year in aggregate. It's largely imo because he's playing way too many minutes. Could actually get him for a reasonable price locked in, he's due a sizable raise and I'd give him one. We have Ras and Weegar who are our only true top 4 D. Bahl and Hanley have played well but it's easy to see which guy is doing the heavy lifting on their pairings. It's great the org has some promising D prospects but NHL defenseman is an extremely demanding position. Unlikely all these guys turn out. Or even half of em honestly.

You want some solid vets to help school the kids up. Huberdeau and Kadri can't teach being a dman. We're already asking too much of Weegar realistically.

 

[Lunatik]

Not sure how many people are watching the youtube series The Chase series the team is putting out but it's very clear Ras is a big part of the leadership group in the room. Probably the most vocal anyway. If he wants to be here I think he'll be here.

He's also not having a great year in aggregate. It's largely imo because he's playing way too many minutes. Could actually get him for a reasonable price locked in, he's due a sizable raise and I'd give him one. We have Ras and Weegar who are our only true top 4 D. Bahl and Hanley have played well but it's easy to see which guy is doing the heavy lifting on their pairings. It's great the org has some promising D prospects but NHL defenseman is an extremely demanding position. Unlikely all these guys turn out.

You want some solid vets to help learn the kids up. Huberdeau and Kadri can't teach being a dman. We're already asking too much of Weegar realistically.

I really need to catch up on The Chase. Might have to start over, not sure where I left off.

 

[JPeeper]

I watched all The Chase, but haven't in months as I thought they stopped putting them out.

Bounces is right though, Ras earns the A he has on his chest, very vocal.

 

[viper0220]

I think making the playoffs or not making the playoffs, this year will have a big impact on what management does going into the draft and the off-season.

If the team makes the playoffs, they might be inclined to, sign older players, make trades that gives "them a chance to win now".

If they miss the playoffs, the management may go to the older players and say, we are going the rebuild way and we may not be making the playoffs anytime soon, if you want a trade to a contender, no feelings will be hurt. And in this situation, the management starts to load up on picks and prospects, in this situation getting a very high pick(s) would, most likely be what the management looks to do.

This is why, if they miss the playoffs but keep winning, not to give a good pick away, I would not be disappointed.

They miss the playoffs and they give a pick but the pick is the highest it can be. And at the draft they unload Backlund, Coleman and Andersson, might be the ideal situation for this organization going forward.

 

[Darth Vladar]

Steinberg posted the morning skate lineup. Backs in and a noticeable Sharky absence. Anderson didn’t skate either, not sure why.

Edit: never mind, probably just maintenance. Still curious who the odd man/men out will be.

 

[DomBarr]

I think making the playoffs or not making the playoffs, this year will have a big impact on what management does going into the draft and the off-season.

If the team makes the playoffs, they might be inclined to, sign older players, make trades that gives "them a chance to win now".

If they miss the playoffs, the management may go to the older players and say, we are going the rebuild way and we may not be making the playoffs anytime soon, if you want a trade to a contender, no feelings will be hurt. And in this situation, the management starts to load up on picks and prospects, in this situation getting a very high pick(s) would, most likely be what the management looks to do.

This is why, if they miss the playoffs but keep winning, not to give a good pick away, I would not be disappointed.

They miss the playoffs and they give a pick but the pick is the highest it can be. And at the draft they unload Backlund, Coleman and Andersson, might be the ideal situation for this organization going forward.

Making or missing the playoffs should not change the direction this team should take. I have heard GM Conroy state it many times that it won't. Chances are I will not agree with where he is taking the team but as long as he keeps focusing on building for long term competitiveness the team should be ok.
I just think that extending Andersson AND keeping Weegar is a misstep and trying to shorten the timeframe by acquiring forward offence via trade or free agency will only result in a continuation of the Flames being a middle of the pack team (placing 11th to 21st in the league)

 

[Khrox]

I just think that extending Andersson AND keeping Weegar is a misstep

The big problem is, we already need to get 1 top 4 Defenseman for next season. Whether that's Parekh, or outside acquisition doesn't matter. Losing Andersson is going to significantly hurt this team in that regard, since we'll have to find a replacement for him (and a second top 4 D), who is likely going to cost similar amounts (even if for a bit less time), who might not fit the culture, may or may not develop chemistry with the team, and who isn't going to (at least at the start) have the leadership qualities that we know Andersson has in the locker room. Which Chych signing for 9 mil AAV at a younger age, with similar point production over the last 5 years (Andersson has like 8 more points in like 60 more games played) but with less goals likely means we can get something closer to 7.5-8. Which in the next few years is very likely to be second pair money anyways. Weegar being versatile and able to play left or right side also means we are able to adjust a fair bit more if multiple prospects start really stepping up and forcing their way on to the team.

 

[Yepthatsme]

The big problem is, we already need to get 1 top 4 Defenseman for next season. Whether that's Parekh, or outside acquisition doesn't matter. Losing Andersson is going to significantly hurt this team in that regard, since we'll have to find a replacement for him (and a second top 4 D), who is likely going to cost similar amounts (even if for a bit less time), who might not fit the culture, may or may not develop chemistry with the team, and who isn't going to (at least at the start) have the leadership qualities that we know Andersson has in the locker room. Which Chych signing for 9 mil AAV at a younger age, with similar point production over the last 5 years (Andersson has like 8 more points in like 60 more games played) but with less goals likely means we can get something closer to 7.5-8. Which in the next few years is very likely to be second pair money anyways. Weegar being versatile and able to play left or right side also means we are able to adjust a fair bit more if multiple prospects start really stepping up and forcing their way on to the team.

My favorite part of this arguement is we have to trade them now because they might get redundant. Why not just trade them if/when they get redundant? Whoever we trade Andersson to at this point will likely try to get an extension put in place immediately. His value doesn’t go down because we are the ones who sign that contract instead of them.

 

[Tkachuk Norris]

If you can sign Ras to a 4-5 year deal sure, I guess. But this team isn’t going to be competitive in the next three years and he’s struggled a lot this year. It just makes no sense.

Having 38 year old Ras at 8-9 million is crazy to me. There will be other veteran D available in FA that will be good options to avoid throwing the young guys to the wolves the next few years.

 

[Sparky93]

I have to agree. 38 year old Ras, is not what we need. I think it's possible we could see his absolute peak value at the draft, when everyone start to get a feel for the prices these UFA defensemen are going to be signing for.

 

[Yepthatsme]

If you can sign Ras to a 4-5 year deal sure, I guess. But this team isn’t going to be competitive in the next three years and he’s struggled a lot this year. It just makes no sense.

Having 38 year old Ras at 8-9 million is crazy to me. There will be other veteran D available in FA that will be good options to avoid throwing the young guys to the wolves the next few years.

So we should sign worse players now, because 9 years from now Andersson might be a worse player? Plus any #2/3/4 UFA defenseman we decide to sign won’t just magically agree to a short term deal for us instead of also wanting a long term contract, and will likely require a bigger overpay than Andersson would to sign here.

The logic doesn’t make sense no matter how you slice it. Imagine the locker room reaction to trading away one of the most vocal leaders who wants to stay here, then immediately trying to sign Wolf/Coronato/Zary to long term team friendly contracts. They would laugh Conroy out of the room.

 

[Iggys Dome]

So we should sign worse players now, because 9 years from now Andersson might be a worse player? Plus any #2/3/4 UFA defenseman we decide to sign won’t just magically agree to a short term deal for us instead of also wanting a long term contract, and will likely require a bigger overpay than Andersson would to sign here.

The logic doesn’t make sense no matter how you slice it. Imagine the locker room reaction to trading away one of the most vocal leaders who wants to stay here, then immediately trying to sign Wolf/Coronato/Zary to long term team friendly contracts. They would laugh Conroy out of the room.

You wanna pay Andersson 8-9M?

 

[Yepthatsme]

You wanna pay Andersson 8-9M?

I would legitimately rather sign Andersson 8M than Gavrikov, Ekblad, Dumoulin, Pionk etc. to equally/more bloated contracts to play worse/equal hockey. Especially considering Andersson still at this point in the season has averaged the hardest defensive deployments and QoC, all the while playing with a second year pro (although Bahl has done a great job), who a portion of this fan base doesn’t even think is a top 4 defenseman. Not to mention he’s an offense first guy on a team that struggles to score. Out of 248 defenseman to play 200 minutes this year, Andersson has the 13th worst on ice shooting percentage, meaning his teammates finish worse than all but 12 defenseman in the league.

I wonder why he may be having a down year. He is the epitome of a guy who will look better as we get better, and who cares how his contract looks 9 years from now. The last 9 years the cap went up over 23%, and that was over a portion called the “flat cap era”.

 

[Tkachuk Norris]

I would legitimately rather sign Andersson 8M than Gavrikov, Ekblad, Dumoulin, Pionk etc. to equally/more bloated contracts to play worse/equal hockey. Especially considering Andersson still at this point in the season has averaged the hardest defensive deployments and QoC, all the while playing with a second year pro (although Bahl has done a great job), who a portion of this fan base doesn’t even think is a top 4 defenseman. Not to mention he’s an offense first guy on a team that struggles to score. Out of 248 defenseman to play 200 minutes this year, Andersson has the 13th worst on ice shooting percentage, meaning his teammates finish worse than all but 12 defenseman in the league.

I wonder why he may be having a down year. He is the epitome of a guy who will look better as we get better, and who cares how his contract looks 9 years from now. The last 9 years the cap went up over 23%, and that was over a portion called the “flat cap era”.

Players are like stocks. Andersson is trending down. You pay for what players will be, not for what they’ve done.

He hasn’t had a great year, his defensive lapses are a lot more concerning than his offensive decline. To me, he already looks like he’s falling a step behind the modern game. I shudder to think where he’ll be in 9 years. He’s never had great fancy stats outside of playing with Hanifin (who I was a huge proponent of signing). Bahl for the most part has been excellent this year.

To me, this team is set up to spend another decade in mediocrity and frankly I want to take some chances in hopes of building a contender.

 

[Iggys Dome]

I would legitimately rather sign Andersson 8M than Gavrikov, Ekblad, Dumoulin, Pionk etc. to equally/more bloated contracts to play worse/equal hockey. Especially considering Andersson still at this point in the season has averaged the hardest defensive deployments and QoC, all the while playing with a second year pro (although Bahl has done a great job), who a portion of this fan base doesn’t even think is a top 4 defenseman. Not to mention he’s an offense first guy on a team that struggles to score. Out of 248 defenseman to play 200 minutes this year, Andersson has the 13th worst on ice shooting percentage, meaning his teammates finish worse than all but 12 defenseman in the league.

I wonder why he may be having a down year. He is the epitome of a guy who will look better as we get better, and who cares how his contract looks 9 years from now. The last 9 years the cap went up over 23%, and that was over a portion called the “flat cap era”.

Why do we have to pay 8-9M for a free agent defenseman anyways? Can’t we just hand out 2 4x5M deals to fill out the roster?

 

[Yepthatsme]

Players are like stocks. Andersson is trending down. You pay for what players will be, not for what they’ve done.

He hasn’t had a great year, his defensive lapses are a lot more concerning than his offensive decline. To me, he already looks like he’s falling a step behind the modern game. I shudder to think where he’ll be in 9 years. He’s never had great fancy stats outside of playing with Hanifin (who I was a huge proponent of signing). Bahl for the most part has been excellent this year.

To me, this team is set up to spend another decade in mediocrity and frankly I want to take some chances in hopes of building a contender.

Players are players, getting rid of them has cascading effects on the entire roster. So your choice to build a contender is by letting top 4 defenseman go for futures? We have nobody who will be a solid replacement in the next 1-2 years making us worse currently, we lose a vocal leader/mentor in the locker room making us worse currently, and we allow ourselves to be a worse team in the future by subtracting a key player in the long term. Even if Parekh and Brzustewicz develop to their full potential, they are both 5-6 years away from their prime. Andersson gives us someone to isolate our youth currently, and down the line an amazing depth option once our prospects push him down the lineup. Keeping him makes us much closer to being a contender than hoping every one of our defense prospects develop enough to replace him in the next 3-4 years.

So your key to building a contender is trading Andersson for the late 1st, B prospect, and player to balance salary? None of those are likely to match a #2-3 defenseman’s value. If Calgary is to be a contender, I think everyone here agrees it’s not by downgrading its current talent while getting a higher volume.

This is Kadri all over again, you fail to see the value of the player due to mitigating factors effecting performance. I guarantee you a 28 year old defenseman is not exiting his prime from his 25-26 year old days.

 

[Yepthatsme]

Why do we have to pay 8-9M for a free agent defenseman anyways? Can’t we just hand out 2 4x5M deals to fill out the roster?

Andersson plays 24 minutes a night on the season, if you plan on playing a player will to sign in Calgary as a UFA for that price in that role with today’s cap things are going to go badly quick.

 

[Tkachuk Norris]

Players are players, getting rid of them has cascading effects on the entire roster. So your choice to build a contender is by letting top 4 defenseman go for futures? We have nobody who will be a solid replacement in the next 1-2 years making us worse currently, we lose a vocal leader/mentor in the locker room making us worse currently, and we allow ourselves to be a worse team in the future by subtracting a key player in the long term. Even if Parekh and Brzustewicz develop to their full potential, they are both 5-6 years away from their prime. Andersson gives us someone to isolate our youth currently, and down the line an amazing depth option once our prospects push him down the lineup. Keeping him makes us much closer to being a contender than hoping every one of our defense prospects develop enough to replace him in the next 3-4 years.

So your key to building a contender is trading Andersson for the late 1st, B prospect, and player to balance salary? None of those are likely to match a #2-3 defenseman’s value. If Calgary is to be a contender, I think everyone here agrees it’s not by downgrading its current talent while getting a higher volume.

This is Kadri all over again, you fail to see the value of the player due to mitigating factors effecting performance. I guarantee you a 28 year old defenseman is not exiting his prime from his 25-26 year old days.

I think fans put too much stock into one player.

Tampa got rid of Sergachev and Stamkos and got better.
Carolina let Skjei and Pesce walk and are still a top team.
Florida let go of Montour and is still a force. Calgary let go of Hanifin, Tanev, Lindholm, and Zadorov and got better.

This team needs elite skill up front. That’s what they are missing going forward. Draft picks are virtually the only way for small market teams to acquire that. Adding a first + and signing a guy like Orlov to a 2-3 year deal makes a lot more sense. Or we could do like Washington and look at the trade market and find the next Chychrun. Maybe we can find another buy low option like Kevin Bahl. There are multitudes to ways to make teams better and usually signing big term FAs doesn’t work out very well.

 

[Yepthatsme]

I think fans put too much stock into one player.

This team needs elite skill up front. That’s what they are missing going forward. Draft picks are virtually the only way for small market teams to acquire that. Adding a first + and signing a guy like Orlov to a 2-3 year deal makes a lot more sense.

The bolded is great irony. People put too much stock in one player, but adding one first in the hopes they become one great player is the key to success.

You agree we need to add elite talents, then why are we subtracting a #2-3 defenseman for a late 1st, who is most likely to be a mid 6/second pair defenseman? You’re argument falls in on itself, we are subtracting high end talent from the roster for a lottery ball that is likely to be worse, but give us more years.

Your hope is that maybe we can trick a team into giving us an Andersson, instead of just keeping Andersson. Why not pick the 100% likely route instead of the 10-30%? It’s just nonsensical. 9 years prior to right now our defense was Gio-Hamilton, Wideman-Brodie, Engelland-Russel; yet you’re worried that we can’t sign Andersson because how will it look in the tail end of the deal? Odds are we have 2-3 players on our entire roster today 8 years from now. Backlund is the only player left on our roster from 9 years ago currently.

This all gets even worse when your entire assumption is based of Andersson at age 38, when we could just as reasonably sign him to less term. You’re creating a narrative based on the worse possible outcome then working backwards.

 

[Tkachuk Norris]

The bolded is great irony. People put too much stock in one player, but adding one first in the hopes they become one great player is the key to success.

You agree we need to add elite talents, then why are we subtracting a #2-3 defenseman for a late 1st, who is most likely to be a mid 6/second pair defenseman? You’re argument falls in on itself, we are subtracting high end talent from the roster for a lottery ball that is likely to be worse, but give us more years.

Your hope is that maybe we can trick a team into giving us an Andersson, instead of just keeping Andersson. Why not pick the 100% likely route instead of the 10-30%? It’s just nonsensical. 9 years prior to right now our defense was Gio-Hamilton, Wideman-Brodie, Engelland-Russel; yet you’re worried that we can’t sign Andersson because how will it look in the tail end of the deal? Odds are we have 2-3 players on our entire roster today 8 years from now.

The bolded is great irony. People put too much stock in one player, but adding one first in the hopes they become one great player is the key to success.

You agree we need to add elite talents, then why are we subtracting a #2-3 defenseman for a late 1st, who is most likely to be a mid 6/second pair defenseman? You’re argument falls in on itself, we are subtracting high end talent from the roster for a lottery ball that is likely to be worse, but give us more years.

Your hope is that maybe we can trick a team into giving us an Andersson, instead of just keeping Andersson. Why not pick the 100% likely route instead of the 10-30%? It’s just nonsensical. 9 years prior to right now our defense was Gio-Hamilton, Wideman-Brodie, Engelland-Russel; yet you’re worried that we can’t sign Andersson because how will it look in the tail end of the deal? Odds are we have 2-3 players on our entire roster today 8 years from now.

Because in my mind Andersson is on the decline. Like I said before you have to know when to hold em and when to fold em. And to me it’s the time to sell high on a depreciating asset in Andersson. Time to find the next Bahl or Chychrun or give opportunity to young players like Parekh to keep this rebuild moving forward.

Last year you were basically saying anyone that wanted to move on from Markstrom was insane because Wolf hadn’t proved anything. And that Markstrom was miles away better.

Draft picks/prospects are no guarantee of anything. But the more you have the more likely you are to find the next Gaudreau. And that’s what this team is lacking right now.

But I know my thoughts will fall on deaf ears. You are basically Murray Edward’s philosophy incarnate. Status quo is good enough for you. And it isn’t for me. I want this team to actually develop into a contender. Even if it means we have to take a step back and finish 8th instead of 18th for a few years.

 

[Yepthatsme]

Because in my mind Andersson is on the decline. Like I said before you have to know when to hold em and when to fold em. And to me it’s the time to sell high on a depreciating asset in Andersson. Time to find the next Bahl or Chychrun or give opportunity to young players like Parekh to keep this rebuild moving forward.

Last year you were basically saying anyone that wanted to move on from Markstrom was insane because Wolf hadn’t proved anything. And that Markstrom was miles away better.

Draft picks/prospects are no guarantee of anything. But the more you have the more likely you are to find the next Gaudreau. And that’s what this team is lacking right now.

But I know my thoughts will fall on deaf ears. You are basically Murray Edward’s philosophy incarnate. Status quo is good enough for you. And it isn’t for me. I want this team to actually develop into a contender. Even if it means we have to take a step back and finish 8th instead of 18th for a few years.

Saying a 28 year old is on the decline is already a bad argument. Once again, he’s bottom in the league in on ice shooting percentage, while being top of our team in QoC and defensive starts. Why he’s having a tough year is literally laid out for anyone wondering.

I said moving Markstrom was a bad idea because last years Wolf wasn’t ready. The leap he took this year proved that wrong. We have NOBODY ready to step up and be a 24 minute defenseman, and that’s not going to be proven wrong by a leap in development by anybody.

Awesome to try and brand people who disagree with you, but having internal improvement while keeping our high end players is the way to build a contender, not lose our high end players while replacing them with potential high end player. What’s the point of subtracting top 4 defenseman in the hopes of getting a different top 4 defenseman? The goal should be to shift our current great players down the lineup with better players.

What’s more likely to win out of these two:

Weegar-Parekh
Bahl-Andersson
Kuznetsov-Brzustewicz

or

Bahl-Parekh
Kuznetsov-Brzustewicz
Grushnikov-Mews

One places a massive hope on every single player developing, and one relies on our constant stream of draft picks back filling our talented players. You say collecting 1sts for players like Andersson is our only hope. Well in the passed 20 years, our picks 16-32 are Backlund, Nemisz, Erixon, Jankowski, Poirier, Klimchuk, Valimaki, Pelletier, Zary, Honzek, and Gridin. Explain to me how adding the average of that pool makes us closer to a contender than keeping Andersson, while keeping in mind we are one of the better developmental teams during that stretch.

Your methodology makes us a worse team 80% of the time on the hopes that 20% of the time it makes us better, which is just kicking the can down the road of both our goals.

 

[DomBarr]

I really don't think Ras is regressing, I think he's playing in a role over his head and it's hurting him statistically. He's being used as a #1, he's not a #1. Against top lines he doesn't see as much offensive zone time as he used to

If that is the case he is going to be paid like a #1 (8 yrs at an AAV over $9 probably over $10 if the Flames get desperate) and played like a #1 (so over his head) for the next couple of years as our RHD prospects mature and supersede him in the line up.
This is why one of Weegar or Andersson have to be traded. Its not because the 2025/26 Flames don’t need them it’s because the 2026/27 Flames have a fairly good chance of not needing both of them and if that’s the case I think Weegar with 5 yrs left at $6 m is better for the Flames than Andersson at 8 yrs

 

[DomBarr]

Awesome to try and brand people who disagree with you, but having internal improvement while keeping our high end players is the way to build a contender, not lose our high end players while replacing them with potential high end player. What’s the point of subtracting top 4 defenseman in the hopes of getting a different top 4 defenseman? The goal should be to shift our current great players down the lineup with better players.

I guess it comes down to people’s view of the prospect pool. I see your view when it comes to the Right d and I see that happening within 2 seasons ( I see a Parekh/Weegar top pair but I also see Bru passing Andersson as well) but no where else is there prospects that project to be better than what is currently there except due to age related regression. What that means is we won’t see that progression from where they are to true contender we see it going the other way