SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

2022 TDL Offseason

Créé par: Traptor
Équipe: 2022-23 Flames de Calgary
Date de création initiale: 27 janv. 2022
Publié: 28 janv. 2022
Mode - plafond salarial: Basique
Description
This encompasses the 2022 TDL and the 2022 Offseason.
Tried to be somewhat realistic with what flames management likes to do.

TDL moves:
Valimaki + Zary + 1st + pitlick for JT Miller
3rd for kulak + 6th (typical BT TDL depth defencemen trade)

Offseason:

Monahan for 2nd

Major signings:
Chuky/JGJ matching 9x8 deals
Mang 4.5x4
Kylington 2x3 (would be nice to somehow sign him to a 5x5)
Kulak 2x1
Gudbranson 2x1
Plus some other depth signings not included, to make prospects fight for spots.
Signatures de joueurs autonomes
RFAANSCAP HIT
89 000 000 $
44 500 000 $
2800 000 $
2850 000 $
23 000 000 $
UFAANSCAP HIT
89 000 000 $
12 000 000 $
12 000 000 $
Transactions
1.
VAN
  1. Välimäki, Juuso
  2. Zary, Connor
  3. Choix de 1e ronde en 2022 (CGY)
2.
CGY
  1. Choix de 2e ronde en 2022 (BOS)
3.
CGY
  1. Choix de 6e ronde en 2022 (MTL)
MTL
  1. Choix de 3e ronde en 2023 (CGY)
Repêchage1e ronde2e ronde3e ronde4e ronde5e ronde6e ronde7e ronde
2022
Logo de CGY
Logo de FLA
Logo de BOS
Logo de CGY
Logo de MTL
Logo de CGY
2023
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
2024
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
TAILLE DE LA FORMATIONPLAFOND SALARIALCAP HITEXCÉDENTS Info-bulleBONISESPACE SOUS LE PLAFOND SALARIAL
2282 500 000 $75 315 833 $0 $0 $7 184 167 $
Ailier gaucheCentreAilier droit
Logo de Flames de Calgary
9 000 000 $9 000 000 $
AG
UFA - 7
Logo de Flames de Calgary
4 850 000 $4 850 000 $
C, AD
UFA - 2
Logo de Flames de Calgary
9 000 000 $9 000 000 $
AD
UFA - 8
Logo de Flames de Calgary
863 333 $863 333 $
AG
RFA - 2
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
5 250 000 $5 250 000 $
C, AG, AD
UFA - 1
Logo de Flames de Calgary
4 500 000 $4 500 000 $
AD, AG
UFA - 3
Logo de Flames de Calgary
4 900 000 $4 900 000 $
AD, AG
NTC
UFA - 5
Logo de Flames de Calgary
5 350 000 $5 350 000 $
C
M-NTC
UFA - 2
Logo de Flames de Calgary
2 300 000 $2 300 000 $
AG, AD, C
RFA - 2
Logo de Flames de Calgary
5 250 000 $5 250 000 $
AG, AD
M-NTC, NMC
UFA - 1
Logo de Flames de Calgary
800 000 $800 000 $
C, AD
UFA - 2
Logo de Flames de Calgary
850 000 $850 000 $
AG, C
UFA - 2
Défenseur gaucherDéfenseur droitierGardien de but
Logo de Flames de Calgary
1 237 500 $1 237 500 $
DG
M-NTC
UFA - 2
Logo de Flames de Calgary
4 550 000 $4 550 000 $
DD
UFA - 4
Logo de Flames de Calgary
6 000 000 $6 000 000 $
G
NMC
UFA - 4
Logo de Flames de Calgary
3 000 000 $3 000 000 $
DG/DD
UFA - 2
Logo de Flames de Calgary
1 125 000 $1 125 000 $
DD
M-NTC
UFA - 2
Logo de Flames de Calgary
750 000 $750 000 $
G
UFA - 1
Logo de Flames de Calgary
2 000 000 $2 000 000 $
DD
UFA - 4
2 000 000 $2 000 000 $
DG/DD
UFA - 4
Laissés de côtéListe des blessés (IR)Liste des blessés à long terme (LTIR)
Logo de Flames de Calgary
827 500 $827 500 $
AD
UFA - 1
Logo de Flames de Calgary
912 500 $912 500 $
DG
UFA - 1

Code d'intégration

  • Pour afficher cette équipe sur un autre site Web ou blog, ajoutez ce iFrame à la page appropriée
  • Personnalisez les dimensions dans le code IFrame ci-dessous pour adapter votre site de manière appropriée. Minimum recommandé: 400px.

Texte intégré

Cliquer pour surligner
28 janv. 2022 à 15 h 35
#1
Judd Bracket ripoff
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2019
Messages: 6,917
Mentions "j'aime": 3,575
Man if the Canucks actually ended up trading miller and THIS was the deal, I’d be so mad lol
28 janv. 2022 à 15 h 37
#2
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: janv. 2021
Messages: 2,771
Mentions "j'aime": 1,386
VAN decline, that trade doesn't fill any of there needs. Also, highly unlikely they move him in the division and he also wants to return back to the states.
28 janv. 2022 à 15 h 39
#3
Démarrer sujet
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: sept. 2020
Messages: 630
Mentions "j'aime": 162
Quoting: The_Rocket
Man if the Canucks actually ended up trading miller and THIS was the deal, I’d be so mad lol


Does Coronate or Pelletier instead of Zary change that?
28 janv. 2022 à 15 h 40
#4
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2021
Messages: 2,170
Mentions "j'aime": 903
2 years for Kylington would be a mistake, I think he will get a 1 year deal so he expires as an RFA one more time, see if he's consistent and then you can pay him when Monahan and Lucic are off the books.
28 janv. 2022 à 15 h 40
#5
Vancouerrific
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: févr. 2019
Messages: 3,214
Mentions "j'aime": 1,052
Canucks reject. Miller to CGY just doesn't work unless Anderson is one of the pieces coming back which isn't happening
28 janv. 2022 à 15 h 41
#6
Go Habs Go
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2017
Messages: 10,667
Mentions "j'aime": 4,091
I feel like I'm missing something. Why are you giving Montreal a 3rd next year for a 6th this year?

Edit: NM I see it now.
28 janv. 2022 à 15 h 43
#7
GO FLAMES GO
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: sept. 2020
Messages: 18,211
Mentions "j'aime": 10,557
Please don't sign Gudbranson to that contract. He isn't worth it
28 janv. 2022 à 15 h 45
#8
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2019
Messages: 37,919
Mentions "j'aime": 19,295
Quoting: yycofred
2 years for Kylington would be a mistake, I think he will get a 1 year deal so he expires as an RFA one more time, see if he's consistent and then you can pay him when Monahan and Lucic are off the books.


1 or 3 years is the correct term on him. 2 years walks him and the sample size of his success is too small to give him 4+ at a higher cap
28 janv. 2022 à 15 h 49
#9
Démarrer sujet
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: sept. 2020
Messages: 630
Mentions "j'aime": 162
Quoting: WhereArtTLuongo
Canucks reject. Miller to CGY just doesn't work unless Anderson is one of the pieces coming back which isn't happening


Quoting: PeterForsberg21
VAN decline, that trade doesn't fill any of there needs. Also, highly unlikely they move him in the division and he also wants to return back to the states.


Thought Van was looking for picks + prospects?
Zary and Valimaki are two first round picks over the last few years + another first.
28 janv. 2022 à 16 h 4
#10
Démarrer sujet
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: sept. 2020
Messages: 630
Mentions "j'aime": 162
Quoting: yycofred
2 years for Kylington would be a mistake, I think he will get a 1 year deal so he expires as an RFA one more time, see if he's consistent and then you can pay him when Monahan and Lucic are off the books.


Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy
1 or 3 years is the correct term on him. 2 years walks him and the sample size of his success is too small to give him 4+ at a higher cap


I think a 3 year average gives you a good window into what that player is. (this year plus 2 more years)
If you extend him to a 1 year, you do retain RFA control, but I believe two years is too small of a sample size. RFA is a useful negotiation tool for the team but it's not going to drastically cheapen the contract, the controlling team still needs to be in the ballpark with the contract. Players always have the option of walking to UFA if they want out or feel like their not getting paid adequately.
3 years would be nice, but you end have to pay the man more. It's going to get difficult to fit all the contract extensions in we need. If you go 3+ years you need to start moving players other plays out.

Quoting: Gmonwy
Please don't sign Gudbranson to that contract. He isn't worth it

I wouldn't do it personally, but I tried to stay realistic with what management has done. With Sutter and BT at the helm, they will want two towers on the third pairing, and 1.5m-2m is about the cost of a third pairing dman. If it's not Gudbranson, it will be a similar caliber of player. For what it's worth, i've been pleasantly surprised with him this year.
yycofred a aimé ceci.
28 janv. 2022 à 16 h 7
#11
Go Habs Go
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: oct. 2021
Messages: 1,927
Mentions "j'aime": 451
HABS say no but HABS will take Monahan for a 2nd
28 janv. 2022 à 16 h 11
#12
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2019
Messages: 37,919
Mentions "j'aime": 19,295
Quoting: Traptor
I think a 3 year average gives you a good window into what that player is. (this year plus 2 more years)
If you extend him to a 1 year, you do retain RFA control, but I believe two years is too small of a sample size. RFA is a useful negotiation tool for the team but it's not going to drastically cheapen the contract, the controlling team still needs to be in the ballpark with the contract. Players always have the option of walking to UFA if they want out or feel like their not getting paid adequately.
3 years would be nice, but you end have to pay the man more. It's going to get difficult to fit all the contract extensions in we need. If you go 3+ years you need to start moving players other plays out.


I think a 1 year extension is definitely the better play, you get a better idea of what he is and mlyou have more cap open up to pay him. 2 year extension gives zero team control and relies on him wanting to resign. 3 years buys 1 UFA season so its a decent middle ground. 4+ is going to cost too much and it is entirely possible he faceplants like Matheson
28 janv. 2022 à 16 h 25
#13
Démarrer sujet
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: sept. 2020
Messages: 630
Mentions "j'aime": 162
Modifié 28 janv. 2022 à 19 h 21
Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy
I think a 1 year extension is definitely the better play, you get a better idea of what he is and mlyou have more cap open up to pay him. 2 year extension gives zero team control and relies on him wanting to resign. 3 years buys 1 UFA season so its a decent middle ground. 4+ is going to cost too much and it is entirely possible he faceplants like Matheson


Yeah, 1 year does make alot of sense, and is where I would put my money. I'm sure brad will covet that RFA control.
28 janv. 2022 à 16 h 44
#14
Judd Bracket ripoff
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2019
Messages: 6,917
Mentions "j'aime": 3,575
Quoting: Traptor
Thought Van was looking for picks + prospects?
Zary and Valimaki are two first round picks over the last few years + another first.


Valimaki isn’t really a prospect. Drafted 5 years ago, still a 3rd pairing D-man. Not much value there right now.

Zary is nice. Not super high end but decent prospect.

Late first round pick is meh. Any team can offer that.

Lebrun reporting a miller trade would cost 3-4 assets. This trade is only 2 good assets and a meh one. Plus it’s in the same division.

Think about it this way. The rangers offering lunqvist (better than zary) and chytil (similar value to valimaki but more important position) plus a 1st would beat this trade, PLUS the Canucks are dealing Miller out of the division.

CGY would have to add if they were serious about miller
PeterForsberg21 a aimé ceci.
28 janv. 2022 à 18 h 13
#15
Démarrer sujet
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: sept. 2020
Messages: 630
Mentions "j'aime": 162
Quoting: The_Rocket
Valimaki isn’t really a prospect. Drafted 5 years ago, still a 3rd pairing D-man. Not much value there right now.

Zary is nice. Not super high end but decent prospect.

Late first round pick is meh. Any team can offer that.

Lebrun reporting a miller trade would cost 3-4 assets. This trade is only 2 good assets and a meh one. Plus it’s in the same division.

Think about it this way. The rangers offering lunqvist (better than zary) and chytil (similar value to valimaki but more important position) plus a 1st would beat this trade, PLUS the Canucks are dealing Miller out of the division.

CGY would have to add if they were serious about miller


I get what you're saying that you need to beat out other offers. Comparing prospects in similar tiers is extremely subjective though, and those packages look nearly identical value wise to me. It really comes down to personal preference at that point.
Here is Pronman's (the athletic) subjective ranking of under 23 players from this year (last year for Valimaki because he's 23) to use as a reference.

Lundqvist (#88 @ age 21)
Chytil (#119 @ age 22)
zary (#108 age 20)
valimaki (#82 last year @ 22)

If you want we can take out Zary and put in Ruzicka (#95 at 22)

A few more counterpoints:
-You say center is more valuable position then D so doesn't that work in Zary's favour as well
-Rangers are 6th(27th OA), Calgary is 16th (17th OA). I wouldn't say those are equal, especially in what's supposed to be a strong draft.
-I'd hope my GM just takes the best package available, even if it is from in div. I wouldn't want a lesser offer just to move him
The_Rocket a aimé ceci.
28 janv. 2022 à 18 h 25
#16
Judd Bracket ripoff
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2019
Messages: 6,917
Mentions "j'aime": 3,575
Quoting: Traptor
I get what you're saying that you need to beat out other offers. Comparing prospects in similar tiers is extremely subjective though, and those packages look nearly identical value wise to me. It really comes down to personal preference at that point.
Here is Pronman's (the athletic) subjective ranking of under 23 players from this year (last year for Valimaki because he's 23) to use as a reference.

Lundqvist (#88 age 21)
Chytil (#119 age 22)
zary (#108 age 20)
valimaki (#82 last year 22)

If you want we can take out Zary and put in Ruzicka (#95 at 22)

A few more counterpoints:
-You say center is more valuable position then D so doesn't that work in Zary's favour as well
-Rangers are 6th(27th OA), Calgary is 16th (17th OA). I wouldn't say those are equal, especially in what's supposed to be a strong draft.
-I'd hope my GM just takes the best package available, even if it is from in div. I wouldn't want a lesser offer just to move him


Really good points. Maybe I’m underrating Valimaaki since it looks like he keeps getting lapped in the Calgary depth chart. I like zary a lot, but I like lundkvist more. So if a 23 year old roster player, top prospect, late first is the price, I will take the one that feature a RHD (Canucks biggest weakness) and sends JT out of the division.

That said, I think I overreacted to the original trade. Still a decent haul all things considered
Traptor a aimé ceci.
28 janv. 2022 à 19 h 20
#17
Démarrer sujet
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: sept. 2020
Messages: 630
Mentions "j'aime": 162
Quoting: The_Rocket
Really good points. Maybe I’m underrating Valimaaki since it looks like he keeps getting lapped in the Calgary depth chart. I like zary a lot, but I like lundkvist more. So if a 23 year old roster player, top prospect, late first is the price, I will take the one that feature a RHD (Canucks biggest weakness) and sends JT out of the division.

That said, I think I overreacted to the original trade. Still a decent haul all things considered


Honestly, it's just the Sutter effect. Sutter's one of the greatest minds in hockey but he hates playing young guys. Our depth hasn't been that good. Valimaki, Ruzika and Pelletier should all have had more looks in the NHL so far.
Yeah from a Canucks perspective I get that 100% and Calgary probably does need to add a bit to if they want beat that Ranger offer.
28 janv. 2022 à 19 h 40
#18
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: janv. 2021
Messages: 2,771
Mentions "j'aime": 1,386
Quoting: Traptor
Thought Van was looking for picks + prospects?
Zary and Valimaki are two first round picks over the last few years + another first.


VAN doesn't need a LHD. Zary is okay prospect. That really doesn't move the needle for VAN.
28 janv. 2022 à 20 h 11
#19
Démarrer sujet
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: sept. 2020
Messages: 630
Mentions "j'aime": 162
Quoting: PeterForsberg21
VAN doesn't need a LHD. Zary is okay prospect. That really doesn't move the needle for VAN.


Yeah, If Van strictly needs a young RHD in the package CGY can't offer that. Woo has some potential though!
Knuckl3s et PeterForsberg21 a aimé ceci.
28 janv. 2022 à 20 h 15
#20
Banni
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: sept. 2021
Messages: 12,418
Mentions "j'aime": 2,630
Quoting: Traptor
Yeah, If Van strictly needs a young RHD in the package CGY can't offer that. Woo has some potential though!


He does
PeterForsberg21 a aimé ceci.
 
Répondre
To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
Question:
Options:
Ajouter une option
Soumettre le sondage