Value of: The price for the Flames to get rid of the Huberdeau contract this summer

[SeanMoneyHands]

Here is the remaining years. For a rebuilding club, what would be the cost for the Flames to move Huberdeau this summer? Even if the Flames retain and are willing to take another bad contract in-exchange?

Click to read more...

 

[HarrySPlinkett]

Huberdeau is unmoveable.

He’s finishing his career as a Flame/on LTIR/both.

There is literally no getting rid of him.

It would cost the equivalent of signing a player to a $10.5M offer sheet.

 

[Ledge And Dairy]

Non existent. Also he's been good for us since New Years. Plus shedding his contract either lands up with other similarly bad contracts or under the cap floor

 

[pth2]

The main problem is that Calgary is likely to be entering a rebuild, even though ownership apparently doesn't realize this yet. Calgary is exactly in the right position to take on such contracts, and doesn't have the spare assets to send off such a contract.

Otherwise, you'd need to find a team entering a rebuild and bribe them with futures... but Calgary doesn't have futures to give up without hurting itself in the long run. And it would be a tough sell to find a team entering a rebuild and willing to take on this kind of contract, since it might still be competitive, but management realizes they'll need to a full rebuild soon (thinking of a team like Pittsburgh here).

 

[Johnnybegood13]

Don't need to get rid of him and probably won't for a couple of years, he'll never live up to the contract but he's been good for a while now, not $10.5 good but good enough not to talk about it.

 

[HuGort]

Here is the remaining years. For a rebuilding club, what would be the cost for the Flames to move Huberdeau this summer?

View attachment 851961

Better off keeping him. Going to cost you a bundle to move him.

Rebuilding teams means young players which usually means plenty caproom. You should be able to carry Huberdeau. At least for few seasons.

 

[Drake1588]

Right now? It's too long and too high for anyone to take him back. There just aren't comparably long and bad contracts on the market to swap and no collection of picks so enticing that an owner will OK it.

The Flames will continue doing what they're doing now, which is working with him to continue improving his game and build the team around him. The Flames never go full rebuild anyway.

 

[weastern bias]

Damn, not only is it unmovable but it's also buyout proof with those signing bonuses

The cost is just waiting it out, the Sharks are dealing with this on the Vlasic deal, you're better off just dealing with the cap handicap now than spending premium assets to lessen the blow in the short term, especially if you think you're entering a non-comptetive rebuild phase, the cap won't be as important to you anyway

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

It's not movable at all but to play devil's advocate here... how much is Calgary retaining?

 

[Flan the incredible]

This is going to get worse. Hubs is over 30 and really doesn't have anything to play for. Guy is putting up 50 something points and the Flames aren't going anywhere. If he is bought out he gets all his money minus 6.33 mill which he would probably make if he still wanted to play somewhere else.

I am not saying he is going to quit on the Flames I am just saying his motivation is at an all time low and that could impact his thought process.

That contract is terrible.

 

[Poppy Whoa Sonnet]

Maybe if the Flames offered Celebrini and retained 50% they'd get someone interested.

 

[BruinLVGA]

This is the mother and father of all boat anchors in the universe. Miracles do happen once in a blue moon, and that‘s exactly what is needed to get rid of that: a bonafide miracle.

 

[wedge]

He's played a lot better in the second half. If he plays like that next year, he could get close to 70 points. Not great, but not as bad.

 

[Bond]

This is the mother and father of all boat anchors in the universe. Miracles do happen once in a blue moon, and that‘s exactly what is needed to get rid of that: a bonafide miracle.

Only way he is moved is in the tail end of the contract and he is on LTIR. Cost to move him would be insane

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

That contract is completely unmoveable. Even if you could package something insanely high, Huberdeau has a full NMC and I doubt has any desire to play for a rebuilding team like San Jose or Anaheim even if they were vaguely interested. I suppose maybe the much nicer climate would be a plus but still.

For the sake of argument though. I'd say you start with your first and a top three prospect. Which is way too steep a price for the Flames, I imagine.

 

[Gaylord Q Tinkledink]

A guaranteed 1st overall in 2026.

 

[BPD]

Stuck with the deal for at LEAST two more years. Even the buyout is brutal - over the duration of the contract, the one window to really land a buyout is 2027, and even then you have two years of damn near the full hit in the four years of "big numbers" remaining.

I think you gotta hope for the best, or start doing what the Oilers did with the Lucic contract. Find a guy whose contract is equally shit, but only goes on until 2029. Make that trade. Then find a contract that's as shit as the one you just got, but expires in 2028. Make that trade too.

 

[Double Dion]

I don't see us needing the cap space for the next 4-5 years. Once there's 2 years left it'll be easier to move it if you need to. We could always start putting itching powder in his equipment and hope he retires due to an "equipment allergy" like Hossa did.

 

[Flames Fanatic]

Here is the remaining years. For a rebuilding club, what would be the cost for the Flames to move Huberdeau this summer?

View attachment 851961

Why exactly are we paying someone to take it? Are we competing? Are we going to use the cap space?

 

[Nanuuk]

Calgary isn't rebuilding and Huberdeau isn't going anywhere.

We're re-tooling and he is going be an important part of it even if at an exorbitant salary.

 

[belair]

The main problem is that Calgary is likely to be entering a rebuild, even though ownership apparently doesn't realize this yet. Calgary is exactly in the right position to take on such contracts, and doesn't have the spare assets to send off such a contract.

Otherwise, you'd need to find a team entering a rebuild and bribe them with futures... but Calgary doesn't have futures to give up without hurting itself in the long run. And it would be a tough sell to find a team entering a rebuild and willing to take on this kind of contract, since it might still be competitive, but management realizes they'll need to a full rebuild soon (thinking of a team like Pittsburgh here).

There's always the potential of making a crap for crap deal where Calgary puts themselves in a position to take 'worse' quality assets at a lower cap hit. And in exchange the acquiring team pays a fair price for the asset and the opportunity to move some unwanted contracts.

Example Montreal moving Gallagher and Anderson. That would offset the salaries for the first four seasons of the contract. Of course there are the five and eight team NTCs that almost certainly contain Calgary. So for good reasons these types of trades almost never occur.

Should've traded Huberdeau the moment they acquired him. Coming off of an entirely unsustainable 115 point season, making $5.9m, only $4.2m in real dollars. He would've pulled a hefty return even without retention.

 

[DingerMcSlapshot]

Nurse.

 

[pth2]

.....

Example Montreal moving Gallagher and Anderson. That would offset the salaries for the first four seasons of the contract. Of course there are the five and eight team NTCs that almost certainly contain Calgary. So for good reasons these types of trades almost never occur.

....

The issue though it that for the later years of Huberdeau's contract he's likely to be as overpaid/worthless as Gallagher and Anderson are right now.

The only team who'd consider a deal of 2 or 3 year bad contracts for 6 years of bad contract is a team contending right now who needs out from a bad contract and doesn't really care about performance in 4 years.

 

[belair]

The issue though it that for the later years of Huberdeau's contract he's likely to be as overpaid/worthless as Gallagher and Anderson are right now.

The only team who'd consider a deal of 2 or 3 year bad contracts for 6 years of bad contract is a team contending right now who needs out from a bad contract and doesn't really care about performance in 4 years.

And that's valid. But you have to remember that the acquiring team isn't making that trade if they view the player as 'worthless'. There are a lot of teams in this league that like the player. And for good reason.

Huberdeau is at worst a 60 point playmaking winger. At best, he's been a guy who flirts with a PPG and plays a very low danger game, which suggests he may not have a significant downturn in production for some time.

It's also of note that four seasons down the road, that ~$10m contract isn't as significant as it looks today assuming the salary cap is north of $100m.

I don't think that it's impossible for Calgary to move his salary. But the deal would have to be creative. And at the end of the day they're giving up marquee player and the pieces coming back are broken toys.

 

[belair]

And then there's always the possibility that Utah says "Hey Calgary, we've got a few picks and a couple mid range prospects and we'll take that whole contract off your hands."

Free wallet for a team that wants to take a big step forward. He's better than anyone available in UFA.