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

[Some Other Flame]

I am loathe to copy the Oilers, but let's say there's concerns about contracts from both sides. Would signing our 3 guys to identical 6 x 6 be a good idea/feel fair for everyone? (Wolf, Zary and Coronato).

No offense but it's an awful idea. Not only is it very unrealistic given those 6x6 deals where in an era where the cap was way lower, it's also terrible asset management and literally the mistake Treliving just made that ended the Flames cup window prematurely.

Six year deals for Zary and Coronato would make them UFA's at 29 aka the Gaudreau special. Wolf would be 31 when he'll need a new contract.

So first, Wolf for example is making a very clear case that he deserves the Oettinger/Swayman contract (8.25M x 8yrs). If the Flames tried to lowball him into taking 6M, all they're doing is creating bad blood giving Wolf every reason to explore free agency when the deal is done, just like Gaudreau did. And if he walks, any potential window is shut. But if you can re-sign him at that point, and assuming of course he continues to play like a franchise goalie, then you're looking at the Shesterkin contract (11.5M x 8yrs) adjusted for cap inflation. Which means for those 2 years, you're now paying an additional 3M+ for the exact same performance.

The Flames have oodles of cap space right now. But when they become more competitive and perhaps even serious contenders in 5 or 6 years, they won't. So why is there so much concern about saving cap right now when it doesn't even matter? The basic essence of a salary cap is about having every dollar the team spends go further than the dollar the opposition spends. Are they going to do that by paying players in their 30's over inflated contracts (aka the Huberdeau and Kadri contracts) or by having their core locked up during their prime years for less than true value?

All you accomplish with these horrible six year deals is insert a ridiculous amount of risk into your competitive window and make it that much harder to win. Yes, there's a risk that maybe some players won't live up to their deals but that's life. You either accept the risk is necessary to build a cup contender or accept that paying players only what they've quote unquote earned means you'll never have the necessary depth to compete with the real cup contenders.

Of course that being said, it's what I fully expect the Flames will do because they, for whatever reason, seem entirely adamant about refusing to accept that it's not 1998 anymore. I fully expect a bridge deal for Coronato, a 5 or 6 year deal for Zary and a 6 or 7 year deal for Wolf because that's just how the Flames operate: shortsightedly.

 

[Yepthatsme]

No offense but it's an awful idea. Not only is it very unrealistic given those 6x6 deals where in an era where the cap was way lower, it's also terrible asset management and literally the mistake Treliving just made that ended the Flames cup window prematurely.

Six year deals for Zary and Coronato would make them UFA's at 29 aka the Gaudreau special. Wolf would be 31 when he'll need a new contract.

So first, Wolf for example is making a very clear case that he deserves the Oettinger/Swayman contract (8.25M x 8yrs). If the Flames tried to lowball him into taking 6M, all they're doing is creating bad blood giving Wolf every reason to explore free agency when the deal is done, just like Gaudreau did. And if he walks, any potential window is shut. But if you can re-sign him at that point, and assuming of course he continues to play like a franchise goalie, then you're looking at the Shesterkin contract (11.5M x 8yrs) adjusted for cap inflation. Which means for those 2 years, you're now paying an additional 3M+ for the exact same performance.

The Flames have oodles of cap space right now. But when they become more competitive and perhaps even serious contenders in 5 or 6 years, they won't. So why is there so much concern about saving cap right now when it doesn't even matter? The basic essence of a salary cap is about having every dollar the team spends go further than the dollar the opposition spends. Are they going to do that by paying players in their 30's over inflated contracts (aka the Huberdeau and Kadri contracts) or by having their core locked up during their prime years for less than true value?

All you accomplish with these horrible six year deals is insert a ridiculous amount of risk into your competitive window and make it that much harder to win. Yes, there's a risk that maybe some players won't live up to their deals but that's life. You either accept the risk is necessary to build a cup contender or accept that paying players only what they've quote unquote earned means you'll never have the necessary depth to compete with the real cup contenders.

Of course that being said, it's what I fully expect the Flames will do because they, for whatever reason, seem entirely adamant about refusing to accept that it's not 1998 anymore. I fully expect a bridge deal for Coronato, a 5 or 6 year deal for Zary and a 6 or 7 year deal for Wolf because that's just how the Flames operate: shortsightedly.

Counterpoint: what I assume you’re hinting at is it’d be awful asset management to offer them 6 year deals instead of the full term 8. Whereas the full term 8 year deals would walk them to the ages of 31 and 33 instead. Basically right when you think our competitive window is starting, we’d have to give large raises to our players in year 2 of it. Not only that, but have to compete with free agency to give them retirement contracts that are going to age horribly as they approach their mid 30s rapidly. Those exact type of contracts you alluded to in Huberdeau and Kadri. Would it not be less short sighted as you referred it to have their first deals finish in the late 20s so the next contract doesn’t turn into the anchors you’re worried about us currently having for our next window?

This is the Fox fiasco all over again. We drafted 1 American NCAA prospect that refused to sign, so plenty of people believe we need to avoid those types because they all could do it. We had 1 player who left in free agency during his prime, so now we can’t afford to ever sign to a bargain deal again because it is going to bite us.

 

[crackdown44]

I don’t think 5-6 years would be that bad. Younger guys tend to look for those types of deals these days. It would also mean their next extension would come after Huberdeau/Kadri/Weegar/Coleman even Sharangovich are all gone or on lesser deals. Cap space is really a non issue

It also means on the next extension you’re paying them from age 28/29-36/37 instead of from like 31 to 39 assuming the next one is 8 years

It would really be tough to go wrong with literally any of the 3 big extensions to get done this summer, no matter what they choose