SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

2022 TDL Offseason

Created by: Traptor
Team: 2022-23 Calgary Flames
Initial Creation Date: Jan. 27, 2022
Published: Jan. 28, 2022
Salary Cap Mode: Basic
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.
Free Agent Signings
RFAYEARSCAP HIT
8$9,000,000
4$4,500,000
2$800,000
2$850,000
2$3,000,000
UFAYEARSCAP HIT
8$9,000,000
1$2,000,000
1$2,000,000
Trades
1.
VAN
  1. Välimäki, Juuso
  2. Zary, Connor
  3. 2022 1st round pick (CGY)
2.
CGY
  1. 2022 2nd round pick (BOS)
3.
CGY
  1. 2022 6th round pick (MTL)
MTL
  1. 2023 3rd round pick (CGY)
DraftRound 1Round 2Round 3Round 4Round 5Round 6Round 7
2022
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the FLA
Logo of the BOS
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the MTL
Logo of the CGY
2023
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
2024
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
Logo of the CGY
ROSTER SIZESALARY CAPCAP HITOVERAGES TooltipBONUSESCAP SPACE
22$82,500,000$75,315,833$0$0$7,184,167
Left WingCentreRight Wing
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$9,000,000$9,000,000
LW
UFA - 7
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$4,850,000$4,850,000
C, RW
UFA - 2
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$9,000,000$9,000,000
RW
UFA - 8
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$863,333$863,333
LW
RFA - 2
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$5,250,000$5,250,000
C, LW, RW
UFA - 1
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$4,500,000$4,500,000
RW, LW
UFA - 3
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$4,900,000$4,900,000
RW, LW
NTC
UFA - 5
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$5,350,000$5,350,000
C
M-NTC
UFA - 2
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$2,300,000$2,300,000
LW, RW, C
RFA - 2
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$5,250,000$5,250,000
LW, RW
M-NTC, NMC
UFA - 1
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$800,000$800,000
C, RW
UFA - 2
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$850,000$850,000
LW, C
UFA - 2
Left DefenseRight DefenseGoaltender
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$1,237,500$1,237,500
LD
M-NTC
UFA - 2
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$4,550,000$4,550,000
RD
UFA - 4
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$6,000,000$6,000,000
G
NMC
UFA - 4
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$3,000,000$3,000,000
LD/RD
UFA - 2
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$1,125,000$1,125,000
RD
M-NTC
UFA - 2
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$750,000$750,000
G
UFA - 1
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$2,000,000$2,000,000
RD
UFA - 4
$2,000,000$2,000,000
LD/RD
UFA - 4
ScratchesInjured Reserve (IR)Long Term IR (LTIR)
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$827,500$827,500
RW
UFA - 1
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$912,500$912,500
LD
UFA - 1

Embed Code

  • To display this team on another website or blog, add this iFrame to the appropriate page
  • Customize the height attribute in the iFrame code below to fit your website appropriately. Minimum recommended: 400px.

Text-Embed

Click to Highlight
Jan. 28, 2022 at 3:35 p.m.
#1
Judd Bracket ripoff
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2019
Posts: 6,917
Likes: 3,575
Man if the Canucks actually ended up trading miller and THIS was the deal, I’d be so mad lol
Jan. 28, 2022 at 3:37 p.m.
#2
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2021
Posts: 2,771
Likes: 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.
Jan. 28, 2022 at 3:39 p.m.
#3
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 630
Likes: 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?
Jan. 28, 2022 at 3:40 p.m.
#4
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2021
Posts: 2,170
Likes: 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.
Jan. 28, 2022 at 3:40 p.m.
#5
Vancouerrific
Avatar of the user
Joined: Feb. 2019
Posts: 3,214
Likes: 1,052
Canucks reject. Miller to CGY just doesn't work unless Anderson is one of the pieces coming back which isn't happening
Jan. 28, 2022 at 3:41 p.m.
#6
Go Habs Go
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 10,667
Likes: 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.
Jan. 28, 2022 at 3:43 p.m.
#7
GO FLAMES GO
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 18,211
Likes: 10,557
Please don't sign Gudbranson to that contract. He isn't worth it
Jan. 28, 2022 at 3:45 p.m.
#8
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2019
Posts: 37,919
Likes: 19,294
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
Jan. 28, 2022 at 3:49 p.m.
#9
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 630
Likes: 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.
Jan. 28, 2022 at 4:04 p.m.
#10
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 630
Likes: 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 liked this.
Jan. 28, 2022 at 4:07 p.m.
#11
Go Habs Go
Avatar of the user
Joined: Oct. 2021
Posts: 1,927
Likes: 451
HABS say no but HABS will take Monahan for a 2nd
Jan. 28, 2022 at 4:11 p.m.
#12
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2019
Posts: 37,919
Likes: 19,294
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
Jan. 28, 2022 at 4:25 p.m.
#13
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 630
Likes: 162
Edited Jan. 28, 2022 at 7:21 p.m.
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.
Jan. 28, 2022 at 4:44 p.m.
#14
Judd Bracket ripoff
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2019
Posts: 6,917
Likes: 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 liked this.
Jan. 28, 2022 at 6:13 p.m.
#15
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 630
Likes: 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 liked this.
Jan. 28, 2022 at 6:25 p.m.
#16
Judd Bracket ripoff
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2019
Posts: 6,917
Likes: 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 liked this.
Jan. 28, 2022 at 7:20 p.m.
#17
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 630
Likes: 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.
Jan. 28, 2022 at 7:40 p.m.
#18
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2021
Posts: 2,771
Likes: 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.
Jan. 28, 2022 at 8:11 p.m.
#19
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 630
Likes: 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 and PeterForsberg21 liked this.
Jan. 28, 2022 at 8:15 p.m.
#20
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2021
Posts: 12,418
Likes: 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 liked this.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Add Option
Submit Poll