Confirmed with Link: Curtis Glencross Traded to Washington for 2nd&3rd Round Picks
- Thread starter Johnny GODreau
- Start date
Johnny GODreau
Boom
- Aug 21, 2014
- 8,582
- 22
Maybe Mike Richards trade talks back on? Get a much more expensive Stajan with playoff pedigree + assets?
TheHudlinator
Registered User
I don't want Richards, if we want an old broken man that's overpaid lets just re-sign GlenX long term. I don't think Richards and his contract is worth it, Richards won't be the same player he was imo.
IgniteTheFlame
Registered User
Was watching Hockey Central @ Noon, and he literally just threw that out there as a possible scenario. Didn't look like he had a source, just his gut feeling. Doug Maclean questioned him on it, saying Flames would likely move those contracts out as players they no longer want, and replace them with $$$ contracts that they do want.
They were simply shooting out scenarios. Kypreos also said Flames may kick tires on Jagr.
Anglesmith
Setting up the play?
While Kypreos might be wrong in principle, he might be right in practice. Wouldn't surprise me if we were trying to trade those guys purely to open roster spots.
Pirate King Luffy
Ferkland
Kypreos thinks he a big shot all of a sudden since Sportsnet got the deal. The only person from them worth believing is Freidman.
Ace Rimmer
Stoke me a clipper.
I would hope the Flames are trying to move Stajan and Raymond. Don't see it as a possibility until the draft though.
Kypreos is just speculating. Jagr would be a terrible fit, especially if he demands a certain amount of ice time.
Kypreos is just speculating. Jagr would be a terrible fit, especially if he demands a certain amount of ice time.
InfinityIggy
Zagidulin's Dad
Why move Stajan and Raymond now? Makes no sense.
1) We aren't in any sort of cap trouble at all.
2) We are trying to make the playoffs, we need our vets for depth.
3) (most important) Both players have term, this means that we can move them at the draft, for a better return when teams have cap space and the term on their contracts is shorter.
The only reason to move them now would be to bring in a bigger piece.
1) We aren't in any sort of cap trouble at all.
2) We are trying to make the playoffs, we need our vets for depth.
3) (most important) Both players have term, this means that we can move them at the draft, for a better return when teams have cap space and the term on their contracts is shorter.
The only reason to move them now would be to bring in a bigger piece.
StreakingRed
....................
IgniteTheFlame
Registered User
Friedman is SN's only reliable source, while the only ones I'd trust from TSN are McKenzie & LeBrun. Others tend to only make up scenarios in their heads, or go off what others have already reported.
- Oct 12, 2012
- 57,815
- 9,853
I'd suggest reading DBU's post below. Friedman very much alludes to the same thing, just different wording.
Anglesmith
Setting up the play?
Salary gained or lost only counts for 1/4 of its worth at the deadline, so I doubt we could actually fall below the floor at this point by trading those guys.
FlamesFan18
Frank the Tank
Correct. What this does mean is if we were to trade the three, we would have about 44m against our cap in the offseason, then we would resign Backlund, Jooris, and Bouma to put us up to about 47-48ish. Today the cap floor is 51m, assuming it goes up we would need to spend about 5m to reach it. I would think instead of bringing in a bunch of similar role guys (or why did we trade these guys?), that they have bigger plans this offseason to trade for or sign a bigger name player. Most likely a top 6 winger or top 4 D. I dont want to go much over the floor because after next season we need to resign Giordano +3, Jones? -1.5, Gaudreau +4, Monahan +4, Colborne +1.5, Granlund +?, Russell +2, Ortio/Hiller/New starter, and whatever prospects who make the jump next season. Really wish Smid and Engelland didnt have two more seasons left.
Anglesmith
Setting up the play?
Yeah, exactly. Backlund, Bouma and Jooris would make collectively north of $5M AAV IMO, and then we go out and sign Green/Michalek/Sekera or someone else to stabilize the back end. Smid/Engelland will be 6/7, and we can still then look for one big name up front. All in all, though, we'd have cleared room for our youth, which should be priority 1 this off-season IMO.
Ace Rimmer
Stoke me a clipper.
I know this, but to make the floor next season they would have to go out and overpay someone or multiple someones in free agency, or take on a less desirable contract from a weaker position.
Anglesmith
Setting up the play?
Either of those approaches is fine with me, as long as management does their homework. It will be worth it to open up space on the roster.
- Oct 12, 2012
- 57,815
- 9,853
How does that really open up space though when you're just replacing dollars with dollars? It's not like Stajan & Raymond would be replaced with a single player, they would likely be replaced with 2 other $3 million players; players whom we don't know if will fit in with our team.
Anglesmith
Setting up the play?
Well that's the discussion, isn't it? If we can bring in a better grade of player in the off-season and trade quantity for quality, then that's a big success. I was keying off of FF18's post where he said rather than signing essentially replacement players who do the same thing, we could use the space to our advantage.
