Speculation: Jonathan Huberdeau is open to waiving his NMC to go to a contender

[LuGBuG]

If Calgary ate 50% of his salary and attached a 1st round pick and a prospect you might get a bit of interest from someone like Pittsburgh. They did the soft rebuild type deals taking back Glass and Kevin Hayes. That's about as close to a "contender" as I can see Huberdeau getting.

That's not to suggest Calgary should do that deal, but that's where I see the value.

If they are retaining 50% they don’t need to add anything. Then his contract becomes great.

 

[tmurfin]

And I’m open to dating Kim Kardashian, so what

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

Merzlinkins (5.4M x 3Y) for Huberdeau (10.5M x 7Y).

• Calgary doesn't want Merzlinkins. He is a proxy for retention. Calgary does not have to burn a retention spot by taking Merzlinkins.
• CBJ dumps 6M prorated this season. Huberdeau's base salary is only 3M.
• They subsidize Huberdeau's contract over the next three seasons by dumping Merzlinkins.
• This gets CBJ a big name star player to go with their fantastic group of upcoming young stars. They are one of the few teams with the cap flexibility to take a risk on Huberdeau.
• Huberdeau waives for Columbus because his options are Columbus or Calgary. There is no perfect contender who wants him. There is an easier travel schedule in the East. The lifestyle is generally better for a hockey star in USA than in Canada.
• You could add in a veteran or journeyman goalie from Calgary's side and an equivalent forward from Columbus to balance out the rosters.
• Merzlinkins would get a fresh start in Calgary. While they don't want him, if you look at their goalie depth, there is a great chance for him to win a backup spot, especially if one of Calgary's goalies goes back to Columbus.

 

[Figgy44]

I certainly didn't. I still remember convincing you guys how much of a mistake signing both was even beforehand. Took a ton of heat for it.

IIRC, our most frequent reply was that we couldn't control what ownership wanted anyways, but if it forced their hand for a rebuild we'd accept that as a silver lining. Many of us also admitted that rebuild wise, it wasn't necessarily ideal, but worked, since those two guys likely would cause us to continue on the wheel of mediocrity vs all out rebuild.

I mean, we were supposed to be a favourite for the Connor McDavid sweepstakes before the 2014-2015 season began. Ownership requested a playoff mandate and the team caught lightning in a bottle. I mean, I'm kinda torn. 2014-2015 was so much fun and it reignited my excitement for hockey. We've constantly retooled since then and the performance has fluctuated between very good and very bad. Stuff that supports ownership's decision, stuff that confirms agains it. I don't think either is wrong, but I think some of us just want to see what a proper rebuild might look like.

Merzlinkins (5.4M x 3Y) for Huberdeau (10.5M x 7Y).

• Calgary doesn't want Merzlinkins. He is a proxy for retention. Calgary does not have to burn a retention spot by taking Merzlinkins.
• CBJ dumps 6M prorated this season. Huberdeau's base salary is only 3M.
• They subsidize Huberdeau's contract over the next three seasons by dumping Merzlinkins.
• This gets CBJ a big name star player to go with their fantastic group of upcoming young stars. They are one of the few teams with the cap flexibility to take a risk on Huberdeau.
• Huberdeau waives for Columbus because his options are Columbus or Calgary. There is no perfect contender who wants him. There is an easier travel schedule in the East. The lifestyle is generally better for a hockey star in USA than in Canada.
• You could add in a veteran or journeyman goalie from Calgary's side and an equivalent forward from Columbus to balance out the rosters.
• Merzlinkins would get a fresh start in Calgary. While they don't want him, if you look at their goalie depth, there is a great chance for him to win a backup spot, especially if one of Calgary's goalies goes back to Columbus.

It's been brought up before and the answer is the optics is not good. Losing Gaudreau and bringing in a Huberdeau which creates an extra layer of reminder will hurt the hearts of both fanbases. There's some logic in the idea that doesn't make it totally unreasonable, but overall in the end, there's quite a few reasons why it doesn't make sense.

 

[spaghtti]

The header sounds like a captain obvious commercial

 

[HockeyWooot]

Pittsburgh with cap retention?

 

[Rubi]

So many people are talking about trading Huberdeau with 50% retention.

Let me put it this way... THE FLAMES ARE NOT GOING TO EAT $37 Million FOR BASICALLY NOTHING IN RETURN.

Frankly I cant envision any return where they ownership would be willing to eat $37M to have a 50 pt player play for someone else. That's just insane.

 

[Figgy44]

IIRC, trading Huberdeau right now at 50% also puts us below the cap floor further than where CBJ is right now. It's an additional facet that makes no sense, especially when the cap hasn't risen yet and his value is at its absolute lowest.

Things are completely different next year or the year after. Trading Huberdeau this year is a perfect way for Flames, Huberdeau and potentially the acquiring team to lose a trade.

 

[tucker3434]

He should go somewhere like Buffalo or Ottawa who might have some cap space e and are looking to exit rebuilds. Calgary could likely go a little better on retention. There. Maybe both sides could get a little lucky.

 

[Figgy44]

He should go somewhere like Buffalo or Ottawa who might have some cap space e and are looking to exit rebuilds. Calgary could likely go a little better on retention. There. Maybe both sides could get a little lucky.

Based on current needs, I think Buffalo prefers Coleman over Huberdeau. Ottawa prefers Weegar over Huberdeau. Probably like 3-5+ players on the Flames roster either team would consider before Huberdeau.

A lot of the Huberdeau stuff needs to stop. Calgary doesn't need to move him. Too many posters are basically trying to figure out weird ways to shove an oversized foot into a glass slipper. Pls stop.

 

[tucker3434]

Based on current needs, I think Buffalo prefers Coleman over Huberdeau. Ottawa prefers Weegar over Huberdeau. Probably like 3-5+ players on the Flames roster either team would consider before Huberdeau.

A lot of the Huberdeau stuff needs to stop. Calgary doesn't need to move him. Too many posters are basically trying to figure out weird ways to shove an oversized foot into a glass slipper. Pls stop.

I'm just shooting from the hip here. I'm not going to pretend to know every team's ideal target. It just seems that there should be some younger, middle standings team that's looking to make a leap that would make some sense and give everybody an uncomfortable win-win solution.

 

[Coach Parker]

Is this start a result of this request and his attempt to show value to the rest of the league?

 

[LOFIN]

Is this start a result of this request and his attempt to show value to the rest of the league?

Still pretty much untradeable contract unless salary is retained.

 

[Coach Parker]

Still pretty much untradeable contract unless salary is retained.

I'd assume so. Shoot for the $5.25 retention but definitely a guy I'd love to see lining up opposite Tkachuk for a seven game series.

 

[Leafs87]

Is this start a result of this request and his attempt to show value to the rest of the league?

Maybe but he’s got 6 years after this one and he’ll be 32 by the start of next year. Unless Calgary is willing to help him with retention, he better get comfortable in Calgary.

 

[KrisLetAngry]

Maybe but he’s got 6 years after this one and he’ll be 32 by the start of next year. Unless Calgary is willing to help him with retention, he better get comfortable in Calgary.

5.25 for 7 years.


55 and 52 points.

I can see him hit 70 a year for a few years.

If he was a UFA today what would he command as a free asset.

7x7 in a bidding war?
6 million 7 years?

Usually you retain to make a profit but if the ultimate goal was to get the player off the team.

Retain 3.5 million or 33.33% and get a B+ or like a 2nd and 3rd?

Is that too little if he was traded today? Would Calgary rather keep him for 10.5 over 7 years or pay 3.5 million for 7 years and get a little something.

 

[Ledge And Dairy]

Is this start a result of this request and his attempt to show value to the rest of the league?

Well considering he never asked for a trade then probably not

 

[Larry Hanson]

Nothing has changed, he's not getting traded anytime soon and no way in hell Calgary is retaining anything for 7 years.
The cap is not a problem, if they traded Huberdeau they'd be under the cap floor.

 

[DJJones]

Nothing has changed, he's not getting traded anytime soon and no way in hell Calgary is retaining anything for 7 years.
The cap is not a problem, if they traded Huberdeau they'd be under the cap floor.

Not to mention Huberdeau for 5.25M would be an unreal contract. Why wouldn't we just keep it