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

[Volica]

Why?
We have nothing but cap space and no one to use it.

 

[Kahvi]

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.

Sure, I'd trade Huby to Utah to few picks and couple of mid range picks

 

[archangel2]

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

about .75 pt a game since Feb 15th

 

[spot]

If the flames can trade Markstrom and vladar this summer for some nice assets, the oilers can trade Campbell for him with 50 percent retention. Campbell/wolf should help with the rebuild and with not winning too many games

 

[DFF]

Never going to happen

At least 50% retention and probably still have to give up a 1st

 

[dgibb10]

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.

Sam Reinhart
Jake Guentzel
Pesce
Skjei
Marchessault
Stamkos
Montour
Roy
Lindholm
etc

All players who I'd straight up rather have than Hubderdeau. None of whom (except maybe reinhart) will cost 10.5 mill AAV

 

[DFF]

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.

He has been a 50 pt player for 2 years now
Team is not getting better any time soon. I doubt he’ll be any more than that on the Flames

 

[DJJones]

Retaining makes no sense. That would hurt for a long time.

Seems to be getting better as well. May as well see how it turns out

 

[pth2]

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.

Oh, I know he has value - right now. But the second half of his contract is going to be ugly... which is what makes him hard to move: you need a team that can use him in his prime right now, but also isn't worried about him in 5 years being a cap anchor. So for example, even though hockey-wise for Montreal to move Gallagher and Anderson for him would be a clear win for Montreal, they also wouldn't do it since he'd be a cap anchor just when the current core will be in its prime.

 

[StumpyTown]

At 50% retained (about 5.25 per) and production in the 50-60 point range expected, Huberdeau still would require a pretty good sweetener to be attractive to another team. At 60+% retained (4.2 or less) he becomes ok to look at and a good risk. The problem is what does Calgary have to give up on top of retention to pay a third team to be involved.

 

[Junohockeyfan]

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.

How about Soup and Kane for Huberdeau with 1M retention? Sounds like something you would advocate?

 

[DomBarr]

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?

View attachment 851961

more assets than a responsible NHL team should pay AND way more retention that a frugal owner like Edwards will allow.

 

[TGWL]

Retaining + bad contract + paying for somebody who can get 40-60 points. At what point does it become not worth moving the contract you already have? It's a long contract to retain on, so I guess the bad cap dump depends on length here.

 

[Junohockeyfan]

Flames will have to see this one through. For the next 4 years it won't be an issue as the Flames will be rebuilding. After that, it could hurt if the Flames are ready to complete and are facing cap issues.

 

[blankall]

No reason to move it.

The Flames are rebuilding for at least a couple of years. Huberdeau is not great on defence, so he's a pretty great tank commander.

The best the Flames can hope for is that Huberdeau is still a capable player in in 4+ years when the Flames are ready to compete. Huberdeau could still be a 65-70ish point player. The cost of that is likely 8.5+ million anyways. Huberdeau has been much improved since the new year, despite playing on a tanking team.

The Flames are most certainly not giving up assets now to move him. If there's one thing the Flames have lots of, especially beginning in 2025/26, it's cap space.

 

[DingDongCharlie]

Too many years remaining on it to be retained on. Nobody is touching the full 10.5M till 2031 on him.

It's not even a matter of what the asset cost would have to be. To get there would be to cripple the Flames of futures assets (multiple 1st + prospects) which would then make zero sense for the Flames. They don't need the cap space, they don't even need him gone. They need to move forward with the rebuilding direction and you don't do that by unload prime assets to move a back contract.

 

[DingDongCharlie]

How about Soup and Kane for Huberdeau with 1M retention? Sounds like something you would advocate?

I'd much rather have 2 years of Kane @5.1m and the Campbell buyout on the books vs Hubby @9.5m for 7 years.

 

[CaptainScrewy]

Panthers take him back at 50% retained plus some future high draft picks.

 

[Bouboumaster]

The price?

Calgary's owner would have to sell himself to slavery to be able to get out of that contract

There's no assets in a hockey trade that would let him get out of that shit

 

[barkovcanfinnish]

You’d need to retain half to get the conversation going. And like many have said it’s not worth moving other assets to dump him at this point.

If I’m Calgary I’d rather wait and hope he hits a level that he was on in his Panther years. I think he still has some elite capability. At this point I think you just ride it out with him and see what you can get out of him.

 

[belair]

How about Soup and Kane for Huberdeau with 1M retention? Sounds like something you would advocate?

If the Oilers were in a position where adding more primary offense was a necessity, yes, that kind of trade would make sense. Teams looking to improve their top end would be wise to look at poor value contracts like Huberdeau's because that's a trade where your team has a considerable amount of leverage.

Though it's also valid that Calgary has zero reason to move on from him as it stands.

Sam Reinhart
Jake Guentzel
Pesce
Skjei
Marchessault
Stamkos
Montour
Roy
Lindholm
etc

All players who I'd straight up rather have than Hubderdeau. None of whom (except maybe reinhart) will cost 10.5 mill AAV

A number of those guys you'd have to pay close to that to even get into the conversation.

 

[Pete Taylor]

Similar things were said before Karlsson had his bounce back season. Albeit it was the highest scoring season from a DMan in 30 years. They got the same AAV too and Hubie is younger. Could possibly move on from it if he manages to pot another triple digit season.
As of right now, you would have to sell the farm just to sell him, which IMO is very not worth it for where Calgary is right now.

 

[Chapin Landvogt]

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

Devil's advocate...

And pretending all parties involved in the deal agree to waive their NMCs/NTCs (which they might not)...

Huberdeau (base salary retained), Pospisil, Pelletier, and Suniev

to the NYI for

LW Anders Lee, D Scott Mayfield, and F Julien Gauthier

 

[dgibb10]

If the Oilers were in a position where adding more primary offense was a necessity, yes, that kind of trade would make sense. Teams looking to improve their top end would be wise to look at poor value contracts like Huberdeau's because that's a trade where your team has a considerable amount of leverage.

Though it's also valid that Calgary has zero reason to move on from him as it stands.


A number of those guys you'd have to pay close to that to even get into the conversation.

Not one of them would cost more than 10.5x7, again except maybe reinhart. And I would take every single one of them over huberdeau in a heartbeat, not even considering contract.

I would not give huberdeau a penny more than 5 mill on a 7 year deal if he was an unrestricted free agent this offseason. a poor defensive winger with 27 goals combined in the last 2 years who's already in his 30s?

 

[Ainsy01]

It would be extremely difficult to move that contact if it expired at the end of next season.

The fact it has another 7 years on it makes it beyond unmovable.

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.

If you think it would only be a first and a prospect, he would have been moved 100 times by yesterday.

It would take 2-3 first and 2-3 prospects, minimum. In a cap world, 10.5 million is hard to even put into perspective how huge it is.

For example. Duchene, who is two years older than Huberdeau, was making 8 million a year for the preds with 3 years remaining. At the time of the buy out he had 197 points in 249 games for the preds and had a 56 point and 86 point season the last two. He was bought out because no team in the league would take him - and I imagine the preds were exploring every option to do so. They bought out a player averaging 0.80 points per game to save 5 million total over 6 seasons.