Cammalleri to Calgary

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1612
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: Cammalleri to Calgary

Post by Potatoe1 »

coco_canuck wrote: A) at what cost should the Flames be trying to make the playoffs at the moment?
The fact they have made it clear that they are trying to win has short and long term value for the franchise.

The last thing in the world you want is for your team to become complacent and ok with losing. Once a group of players fall into that pattern it becomes incredibly difficult to break the cycle. It also seems that young players tend to develop poorly in that type of environment. The top end guys seem to be OK, but the mid range guys rarely seem to go on to be productive players. Just look at the grave yards that teams like the Jackets, Oilers, Kings, and Islanders seemed to become.

That is going to become a huge issue for the Oilers, they are developing their top players but their mid level guys have totally stagnated. Further to that even when they finally have all the pieces they need the will still have a group of players that has no clue what it takes to win consistently at the NHL level. I suspect they will have major issues in terms of their conditioning, consistency and off ice professionalism.

The other part of the equation will be the perception of the free agent pool. Being a playoff team gives the club a big advantage when it comes to attracting and retaining free agents.

The flames projecting an image of a team who wants to win gives them a big advantage over a crap team that claims to be rebuilding.

B) Is Cammalleri worth the extra cap-hit and giving up the 2nd round pick if we consider Ramo and Holland a prospect wash?
Yes Cammy is worth it.

He's 29 and a guy who will get 25 to 35 goals when healthy. He's also an excellent playoff performer.

He should have another 2 -3 seasons at least before he starts to decline. Like most middling teams I don't think their cap will be much of an issue moving forward.

The Flames will have some cap space coming up, but depending on the cap next-season, the Flames may not have as much space as some fans think, especially after re-signing Comeau and Backlund now that they've added almost $3M on their cap with the Cammalleri move.
Not sure how you can say that.

The players will take the kicker again so the Flames should have around 20 mill to sign 3 or 4 good players and 3 to 4 plugs. Give 5 mill to their RFA's, 2 mill to the Plugs, and they have around 13 mill to spread between 3 quality players.

Outside of landing a "big fish" type free agent I doubt they will be a full cap team next year.
User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
Posts: 12310
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: Cammalleri to Calgary

Post by Topper »

The cap hit on Cami is $6mil, but his contract is back loaded, $6mil this year and $7mil the next two. Without a few home playoff dates to pay some of that off, in real out of pocket money, it is ugly.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1612
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: Cammalleri to Calgary

Post by Potatoe1 »

Topper wrote:The cap hit on Cami is $6mil, but his contract is back loaded, $6mil this year and $7mil the next two. Without a few home playoff dates to pay some of that off, in real out of pocket money, it is ugly.
Funny that a big revenue team like the Habs would sign a deal like that. They most likely could have lowered the cap hit somewhat by front loading.
ESQ
MVP
MVP
Posts: 3216
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:34 pm

Re: Cammalleri to Calgary

Post by ESQ »

coco_canuck wrote:True, but his salary this season was over $2M, and the qualifying offer has to be equal to that. Of course they can negotiate a lower salaried deal over a longer term, but it could be a situation where they just walk away from him this off-season.
I'm sure they'll throw a NTC in there, just to make the deal more palatable.
User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

Re: Cammalleri to Calgary

Post by coco_canuck »

Potatoe1 wrote: The last thing in the world you want is for your team to become complacent and ok with losing.

The other part of the equation will be the perception of the free agent pool. Being a playoff team gives the club a big advantage when it comes to attracting and retaining free agents.
I agree to an extent.

The issue with Calgary is they have a dearth of high-end, young talent either on the team or in the pipelines. I can get behind a team with good prospects not going into re-build mode, but when the future of your team looks really dim once Iginla's downturn is complete, at some point you have to begin accumulating young assets and developing good talent.

Building through Free Agency is only good for teams that already have a solid base of young talent they can build around. In the Flames case, they may overpay a couple of 2nd tier free-agents, but what is the ultimate payoff when they may not be good enough to take over for Iginla?

You may be saddled with more unseemly contracts and a mediocre team that's not bad enough to get high picks.

Florida built their team through trades and free agency, but they had a ton more cap space and they have a better prospect/young player pool than Calgary.
Potatoe1 wrote: Yes Cammy is worth it.
Only if we agree on the state of their franchise and what they should be doing.
Potatoe1 wrote: The players will take the kicker again so the Flames should have around 20 mill to sign 3 or 4 good players and 3 to 4 plugs. Give 5 mill to their RFA's, 2 mill to the Plugs, and they have around 13 mill to spread between 3 quality players.
Well right now they have just under $18M in cap space for next season with 15 roster spots taken. There are a few borderline NHLers on that list, but their salaries will be replaced by similar figures for the last few spots.

If they elect to keep Comeau, and once they re-sign Backlund, that will add at least $3M to their cap, so that brings it to $15M.

Now, if they cap decreases moderately for next year, say $2M, then they have $13M in cap space to fill out 4-5 roster spots. Say 2 of those spots are near minimum for a combined $1.4M, then Calgary has just over $11M for 2-3 roster spots, specifically for the 2nd line to replace Jokinen.

I don't think $11-13M in real cap space to spend on high-end free agents is enough money.

Right now the Flames roster looks like this for next season if they keep Comeau:

Cammy Tanguay Iginla
Glencross Stajan
Comeau Backlund
Horak Bouma

Bouwmeester Giordano
Butler Brodie
Babchuck
Carson

First of all, the Flames don't have a real 1st line C, so they'll need to get one someway, somehow to really compete. But for arguments sake, let's say they can get away with adding a 2nd line C.

So the Flames need:

2nd C
2nd Winger
Two- top 4-dmen

I'm not sure $11-15M (At the very most) will help them add all those pieces. They certainly don't have enough money to add all those pieces through FA, so they would have to make trades with their already limited solid prospect pool.

I just don't see where optimism is if you're a Flames fan. I get you don't want to have a shit team for 4-6 years, but how are they going to add the young talent this team needs without trading their most valuable veterans and/or accumulating high picks with poor finishes.
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1612
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: Cammalleri to Calgary

Post by Potatoe1 »

coco_canuck wrote: Now, if they cap decreases moderately for next year, say $2M, then they have $13M in cap space to fill out 4-5 roster spots.

If the status quo remains the same with regard to the CBA then the players will take the kicker and it will go up by 3+ mill again.

If they CBA changes then who knows,

Also note if the cap drops we will see a fairly major drop in the price of free agents so the 12 to 13 mill you were talking about becomes very different then what we were seing people do with that amount of cap room last year.

I`m actually not sure if the flames are better off with 13 mill in a buyers market or 18 mill in a sellers market.

As far as their lack of prospects go, with good drafting and development you can build a very good prospect pool even if you are a middling team.

I just don't see where optimism is if you're a Flames fan. I get you don't want to have a shit team for 4-6 years, but how are they going to add the young talent this team needs without trading their most valuable veterans and/or accumulating high picks with poor finishes.

Don`t get me wrong, I`m not trying to paint a rosy picture of that organization.

What I`m saying is that a `scorched earth`approach is not automatically the way to go.

If they trade all their players for draft picks and sit in the lottery for 5 years they will not necessarily be any further of where they will be in 5 years if they hover around the middle and focus on good drafting and development.

Conventional thinking says `blow it up`but if you look at the top teams in the league right now very few of them did what the Oilers are doing. The Canucks, Wings, Flyers, Rangers, Blues, Sharks, and Bruins, all tried to win even when they were bad but stil managed to rebuild their teams through that period. Only the Hawks and Pens took the scorched earth approach.
Last edited by Potatoe1 on Wed Jan 18, 2012 1:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
tantalum
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1911
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:41 am
Location: Carl Junction, MO

Re: Cammalleri to Calgary

Post by tantalum »

There is a link on hfboards but apparently Laraque has a Cammalleri story where Cammalleri went to the coach at the time (martin?) and asked for a letter. Coach responded by telling him that if he wanted a letter perhaps he should start playing like he deserves a letter. During the players little gift exchange LaPierre put a cloth "C" in a box and wrapped it up. When Cammalleri opened the box he got upset and stormed out while the rest of the players laughed. If it's a true story (with laraque I'm never sure if it is or not) and the current lack of sadness from the Habs with him being gone it would seem that Cammalleri never fit in that dressing room. of course a few short months later, LaPierre was traded and Cammalleri was an important part of some Habs playoff success.
User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

Re: Cammalleri to Calgary

Post by coco_canuck »

Potatoe1 wrote: Also note if the cap drops we will see a fairly major drop in the price of free agents so the 12 to 13 mill you were talking about becomes very different then what we were seing people do with that amount of cap room last year.
I'm not sure that will automatically happen because any potential reduction will not be as significant as we saw with the implementation of the this current CBA. IMO, at the very most the cap will go down is around $5M, because I don't see the the players going below a 50/50 split in revenues, and with the rate revenues are growing each year, a 50/50 split on this season's revenues, even without the kicker, should allow for a decent cap figure.

Obviously these are just my own projections, but if the cap goes down about $5-7M, I don't foresee a huge decrease in player salaries, certainly not for the higher tier guys...especially when there will be a number of teams with a great deal of cap space heading into next season.
Potatoe1 wrote: Conventional thinking says `blow it up`but if you look at the top teams in the league right now very few of them did what the Oilers are doing. The Canucks, Wings, Flyers, Rangers, Blues, Sharks, and Bruins, all tried to win even when they were bad but stil managed to rebuild their teams through that period. Only the Hawks and Pens took the scorched earth approach.
I don't think there's an absolute when it comes to either striving to barely make the playoffs or blowing it up, it's relative to the situation each team is in.

All those teams you mentioned have developed their own key players, and the Blues did sell off their top players during the deadline on a couple of occasions, with Weight and Tkachuck being the most notable. The Rangers comeback has happened due mainly to a bevy of young players they've developed and drafted, same goes with the Sharks and Bruins.

The Canucks had the Twins, two high picks in the pipeline, and the Flyers resurgence after the lock-out was on the backs of Carter and Richards, two homegrown players. The Flyers best player right now is Giroux, another homegrown player. The Flyers are a team that has constantly drafted and developed good players out of late 1st rounders and lower round draft choices. Same goes with Detroit.

Also, you have to keep in mind that Jay Feaster, a GM with a shoddy record of drafting and developing players is in charge of the Flames. I wouldn't place much faith in him churning out a great deal of prospects out mid 1st rounders and lower round picks. The Flames as an organization have been pretty terrible at drafting and developing young players since the lockout.

Since that's the case, you might ask why they should place more emphasis on getting picks and prospects...but the reason is, the higher your picks, the more likely you are to choose a good player, even if the evaluative process of your organization is lacking.
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1612
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: Cammalleri to Calgary

Post by Potatoe1 »

coco_canuck wrote: Obviously these are just my own projections, but if the cap goes down about $5-7M, I don't foresee a huge decrease in player salaries, certainly not for the higher tier guys...especially when there will be a number of teams with a great deal of cap space heading into next season.
Not sure how you can say that.

drop the cap 5-7 mill and there will be few teams with space and a ton of teams desperate to shed salary (including our team)

All those teams you mentioned have developed their own key players, and the Blues did sell off their top players during the deadline on a couple of occasions, with Weight and Tkachuck being the most notable. The Rangers comeback has happened due mainly to a bevy of young players they've developed and drafted, same goes with the Sharks and Bruins.
Yes, this is IMO how teams should be rebuilt, not the stupid Oiler model which rarely actually works (despite what fans and media would have us believe).

Since that's the case, you might ask why they should place more emphasis on getting picks and prospects...but the reason is, the higher your picks, the more likely you are to choose a good player, even if the evaluative process of your organization is lacking.
Well aware, but again my point is that losing and being horrible over a long period of time, does more damage to your team then can typically be made up for with the higher end draft picks.

I think we just disagree here, but if I were a Flames fan the last thing I want to see is an Oilers style re-build. I would want to see my team draft and develop quality players, then be aggressive in the free agent market. I believe that over a 5 or 6 year period the team that does things right and fluctuates between 10th and 20th will be healthier then the club that embraces losing.
User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

Re: Cammalleri to Calgary

Post by coco_canuck »

Potatoe1 wrote: Not sure how you can say that.

drop the cap 5-7 mill and there will be few teams with space and a ton of teams desperate to shed salary (including our team)
I'm not saying anything revelatory.

In terms of team cap figures for 11-12, currently there are 18 teams that have more cap space than Calgary.

http://capgeek.com/index.php?charts_year=2012

Regardless of what happens with the CBA, 14 of those 18 teams will have significantly more cap space than Calgary going into FA.

As for how much the cap will decrease, I threw out 5-7M as the absolute worst-case scenario, which I don't see unfolding.

I'd love to get into a long discussion about the CBA, but I have a feeling we're gonna be sick of talking about it next summer and likely into fall.

But I'll share a brief thought nonetheless.

I think Fehr is the right guy to do the job for the players in these negotiations. The owners will likely coming out and ask for some ridiculous concessions from the players, and corner them into ultimately make significant concessions.

Fehr likely won't let the NHL bully the PA, and that's main reason why realignment was derailed. In the end, we might miss a few games, but he'll keep the NHL from getting a more rigid system.
Potatoe1 wrote: I think we just disagree here, but if I were a Flames fan the last thing I want to see is an Oilers style re-build. I would want to see my team draft and develop quality players, then be aggressive in the free agent market. I believe that over a 5 or 6 year period the team that does things right and fluctuates between 10th and 20th will be healthier then the club that embraces losing.
Just to make it clear, I'm not advocating the Flames do an Oiler's style re-build, but I don't think they should be as aggressive and loose with draft picks as they've been.

They need to get some young assets into that team, and that means trading Iginla. If they can move him for a 1st and high-end prospect/young player, plus whatever else included, they take a big step towards being a contender in the next 4-5 years.

Not every re-build has to be Oiler's type, it can be like the Canucks, who traded a player in his early 30's, Bertuzzi, and got Luongo in return.

People can say what they want about Luongo, but if Nonis had held on to Bertuzzi out of a desire to keep the WCE days going, we wouldn't have the team we have today.

The point is, unless you're a contender, you can't hold on to aging star players who can help re-shape the franchise.

If the Flames keep this thing going, they may indadvertedly fall into an Oilers' tail-spin once Iginla and Kipper fade away.
User avatar
BCExpat
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 516
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 6:18 pm

Re: Cammalleri to Calgary

Post by BCExpat »

First off - I don't see Holland for Ramo as a wash. Ramo is a top goalie prospect - Holland is a 3rd or 4th liner at best.

I'm not sure about the negative stories regarding Cammalleri. He is very well liked by his team mates and fans in Calgary. Then again, I'd be pissed off if I was playing for a shitty team like Montreal, especially with their press.

As for Feasters draft record - he has built a stanley cup winner - enough said. The problem is, he has such a long ways to go in Calgary. If they keep getting draft picks like Bartschi, then they will be there eventually. He's moving in the right direction (generally). He upgraded the team with this trade.

As many on here have posted, I think that trying to keep the team competitive, while re-building, is the way to go. If you look at the teams way back when there was only the original 6, teams all had a mixture of veterans and youth, and were bring up one or two guys every year, to replace some of the vets. They didn't rip their teams apart - they just re-tooled.

Anyway, I'm expecting 5 years before we finally see some results in Calgary - and that's assuming management makes the right moves.
Whale Oil Beef Hooked
"When you come to a fork in the road, take it" - Yogi Berra
User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

Re: Cammalleri to Calgary

Post by coco_canuck »

BCExpat wrote:First off - I don't see Holland for Ramo as a wash. Ramo is a top goalie prospect - Holland is a 3rd or 4th liner at best.
Sure, if the hype over Ramo turns out to be justified.

He's a 6th round pick who struggled in the NHL and the AHL and is having a second solid year in the KHL.

We'll see how good he is when he comes over.
BCExpat wrote: As for Feasters draft record - he has built a stanley cup winner - enough said.
Ok, so the draft record doesn't matter because he won the cup?
BCExpat wrote: As many on here have posted, I think that trying to keep the team competitive, while re-building, is the way to go. If you look at the teams way back when there was only the original 6, teams all had a mixture of veterans and youth, and were bring up one or two guys every year, to replace some of the vets. They didn't rip their teams apart - they just re-tooled.
Those teams all accumulated high-end young talent and created deep prospect pools. Calgary' situation and Feaster's draft record, which you gloss over, aren't exactly analogous to the other teams that have been discussed. Besides, if you want to re-tool, at some point you have to give up something to get something unless your asset cupboard is stocked full.
ESQ
MVP
MVP
Posts: 3216
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:34 pm

Re: Cammalleri to Calgary

Post by ESQ »

BCExpat wrote: As for Feasters draft record - he has built a stanley cup winner - enough said.
Feaster had literally no background in hockey when he entered the business. As assistant GM in Tampa, he was in charge of legal and contractual issues. He became GM in Feb. 2002.
The 2004 team only had 5 Tampa draft picks on the roster. They only had one Feaster pick, and that was Paul Ranger as 6th d. Only 3 Feaster picks have played over 100 NHL, and the only one that will surpass 250 games is Stamkos.

So lousy draft record, good pro scouting led to Tampa's Cup. If I'm not mistaken, Tampa has the record for fewest draftees on a championship team. I remember hearing a stat a few years ago that the only team to win the Cup without a significant portion of the roster (can't remember the number now, 50% maybe) being draftees was Dallas Stars.
User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

Re: Cammalleri to Calgary

Post by coco_canuck »

ESQ wrote:
BCExpat wrote: As for Feasters draft record - he has built a stanley cup winner - enough said.
Feaster had literally no background in hockey when he entered the business. As assistant GM in Tampa, he was in charge of legal and contractual issues. He became GM in Feb. 2002.
The 2004 team only had 5 Tampa draft picks on the roster. They only had one Feaster pick, and that was Paul Ranger as 6th d. Only 3 Feaster picks have played over 100 NHL, and the only one that will surpass 250 games is Stamkos.

So lousy draft record, good pro scouting led to Tampa's Cup. If I'm not mistaken, Tampa has the record for fewest draftees on a championship team. I remember hearing a stat a few years ago that the only team to win the Cup without a significant portion of the roster (can't remember the number now, 50% maybe) being draftees was Dallas Stars.
Thanks for the details, I was too busy to look them up yesterday.

Feaster clearly did something right since he was the GM of a cup winner. But, when you have a team short on young, high-end talent, it's more than fair to size up the GM's draft record. History doesn't necessarily repeat itself, but Feaster does not have a good history of developing draft picks. If I were a Flames fan I'd want to see some results in the player development department before being overly confident in Feaster as the long-term GM.
ESQ
MVP
MVP
Posts: 3216
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:34 pm

Re: Cammalleri to Calgary

Post by ESQ »

Regarding the Oilers strategy, I thought this was interesting - Oilers poised to become 2nd team in NHL history to get three-straight first overall picks http://thestar.blogs.com/thespin/2012/0 ... story.html

I want to say such a long string of futility is the wrong way to go, But Pitt went 1st (fleury), 2nd (Malkin), 1st (Crosby), 2nd (Staal), which is unbelievably terrible. Of course, in the process they picked up 2 generational talents, which I don't think the Oilers are doing.
Post Reply