GM Hockey

You are not connected. Please login or register

GM Hockey » Breaking Rumours!! » Trade D-Day Speculation » Cammalleri Traded

Cammalleri Traded

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Go down  Message [Page 5 of 6]

61Cammalleri Traded - Page 5 Empty Re: Cammalleri Traded on Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:19 pm

PTFlea


Co-Founder
Co-Founder
tim1_2 wrote:
SpezDispenser wrote:Why didn't they create a market for him first? LeBrun just tweeted that a GM told him that they wished they knew he was available so they could have bid on him. Why didn't they try to weigh their options. I'll never understand that Dung.

The biggest mystery in the NHL is how Gauthier still has a job. OF COURSE you shop a guy like Cammalleri around.

Who wouldn't know that though...I guess Gauthier wanted Bourque badly enough to pull the trigger on it with the 2nd in there. Interesting...not sure what to say...I would have tried for a top prospect or a 1st, but Bourque's not a bad piece.

62Cammalleri Traded - Page 5 Empty Re: Cammalleri Traded on Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:20 pm

SeawaySensFan


Franchise Player
Franchise Player
spader wrote:
SpezDispenser wrote:Why didn't they create a market for him first? LeBrun just tweeted that a GM told him that they wished they knew he was available so they could have bid on him. Why didn't they try to weigh their options. I'll never understand that Dung.

@Real_ESPNLeBrun
Pierre LeBrun
One NHL GM when told of the trade, said he wished he knew Cammalleri was available. Would have made an offer.

That's just an old Halak tweet with "Cammalleri" replacing "Halak"

63Cammalleri Traded - Page 5 Empty Re: Cammalleri Traded on Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:21 pm

spader


All-Star
All-Star
SpezDispenser wrote:Who's this Holland kid?

I can't stand CP, but he had this to say about it:

@coreypronman
Corey Pronman
Talked to scouts about Patrick Holland earlier this week. Consensus was career minor leaguer fringe 4th liner. I think could be avg 4th.

64Cammalleri Traded - Page 5 Empty Re: Cammalleri Traded on Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:26 pm

PTFlea

PTFlea
Co-Founder
Co-Founder
spader wrote:
SpezDispenser wrote:Who's this Holland kid?

I can't stand CP, but he had this to say about it:

@coreypronman
Corey Pronman
Talked to scouts about Patrick Holland earlier this week. Consensus was career minor leaguer fringe 4th liner. I think could be avg 4th.


Okay then...

65Cammalleri Traded - Page 5 Empty Re: Cammalleri Traded on Fri Jan 13, 2012 9:09 am

tim1_2

tim1_2
Franchise Player
Franchise Player
The more I think about it, the more I like it for Montreal. Bourque and Cammalleri's offensive production have been pretty much even the last two years, Bourque is much more physical, and cheaper (although on a longer-term contract).

I have no idea how Calgary is going to swallow the $6M/year Cammalleri contract until 13/14. As it stands, Calgary will have to shed $2.5M in salary once they have their injured players back. All their expensive players have NTCs, meaning it's going to be tougher for Calgary to make reasonable trades.

Next year things will become more manageable for the Flames, but this also assumes that their roster will stay relatively the same...which isn't a good thing.

66Cammalleri Traded - Page 5 Empty Re: Cammalleri Traded on Fri Jan 13, 2012 9:27 am

shabbs

shabbs
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
I think Calgary won this one. At his very worst, Cammalleri = Bourqe as far as point production. Cammalleri is the better player overall. For sure.

Habs do get cap relief by moving Cammy's contract.

I'm still not sure how Calgary fits all this under the cap now. Do they have some LTIR relief?

67Cammalleri Traded - Page 5 Empty Re: Cammalleri Traded on Fri Jan 13, 2012 9:51 am

tim1_2

tim1_2
Franchise Player
Franchise Player
shabbs wrote:I think Calgary won this one. At his very worst, Cammalleri = Bourqe as far as point production. Cammalleri is the better player overall. For sure.

Habs do get cap relief by moving Cammy's contract.

I'm still not sure how Calgary fits all this under the cap now. Do they have some LTIR relief?

Quoted from above: "They do have some guys on IR: Stajan, Brett Carson, David Moss, Henrik Karlsson, Tanguay, D. Smith, and Scott Hannan. Wow. So yeah, maybe they do have enough IR cap space to absorb Cammalleri without more moves tonight. "

I'm not sure why this deal makes sense for Calgary? Does Cammalleri somehow put them "over the top"? No. They are in 12th place. Cammalleri isn't going to bring them a cup…not even close. And they give up a 2nd round pick, when they have a void of prospects??

It really doesn't make sense. Makes more sense from a Montreal perspective…and that is frightening.

68Cammalleri Traded - Page 5 Empty Re: Cammalleri Traded on Fri Jan 13, 2012 10:01 am

Hoags

Hoags
All-Star
All-Star
Montreal is so messed up. I was a Habs fan before we got the Sens but I still followed them a little bit.

I totally stopped caring after they traded Patrick Roy for peanuts and it seems over a decade later they are still stupid.

69Cammalleri Traded - Page 5 Empty Re: Cammalleri Traded on Fri Jan 13, 2012 10:20 am

Riprock

Riprock
All-Star
All-Star
Well, after reading Bob McKenzie's article, I'm almost ready to say that this is a win-win.

Bourque's not terrible as people make him out to be. Give's the Canadiens something Cammalleri (as good as he is) didn't - size. He's on pace for another 27 goals.

Calgary I guess is better off with Cammalleri 0 they are familiar with him, and they wanted a change from Bourque and are hoping for a repeat performance from him.

Montreal also saves about $3M in cap space (giving them ~$8M in [prorated] space now), which means the possibility of making a big move or a few smaller ones.

70Cammalleri Traded - Page 5 Empty Re: Cammalleri Traded on Fri Jan 13, 2012 10:33 am

tim1_2

tim1_2
Franchise Player
Franchise Player
Riprock wrote:Well, after reading Bob McKenzie's article, I'm almost ready to say that this is a win-win.

Bourque's not terrible as people make him out to be. Give's the Canadiens something Cammalleri (as good as he is) didn't - size. He's on pace for another 27 goals.

Calgary I guess is better off with Cammalleri 0 they are familiar with him, and they wanted a change from Bourque and are hoping for a repeat performance from him.

Montreal also saves about $3M in cap space (giving them ~$8M in [prorated] space now), which means the possibility of making a big move or a few smaller ones.

But how much "better off"??? Sure, this is an improvement in the short term (cap pain aside), but giving up the 2nd rounder as well? Also, what does this "improvement" get Calgary? MAYBE an 8th seed? And then less prospects in the cupboard.

71Cammalleri Traded - Page 5 Empty Re: Cammalleri Traded on Fri Jan 13, 2012 10:38 am

Riprock

Riprock
All-Star
All-Star
Bur if they didn't want Bourque, and they were able to re-acquire Cammalleri, that's a win for them in their eyes.

And if Calgary does decide to blow it up, they have Cammalleri now to build around, gives them some salary to afford not to take back any if they unload some big tickets.

72Cammalleri Traded - Page 5 Empty Re: Cammalleri Traded on Fri Jan 13, 2012 11:06 am

tim1_2

tim1_2
Franchise Player
Franchise Player
Riprock wrote:Bur if they didn't want Bourque, and they were able to re-acquire Cammalleri, that's a win for them in their eyes.

And if Calgary does decide to blow it up, they have Cammalleri now to build around, gives them some salary to afford not to take back any if they unload some big tickets.

Can you explain the bolded part? Are you saying that Calgary wouldn't have to take salary back in other trades now because they have even less cap space????? This is a plus?

Edit: Ah, I think you're thinking about them staying above the cap floor? HA!! They'd need to shed like obscene amounts to worry about that...won't happen.

73Cammalleri Traded - Page 5 Empty Re: Cammalleri Traded on Fri Jan 13, 2012 12:25 pm

Riprock

Riprock
All-Star
All-Star
Yeah, pretty much what I was aiming for. Very unlikely they will have to worry about it, but if, for example, they traded Iginla, Stajan and Kipper, that would be a loss of about ~17M. They'd likely take on salary in return, since not to many teams can afford a big ticket without losing one.

74Cammalleri Traded - Page 5 Empty Re: Cammalleri Traded on Fri Jan 13, 2012 12:49 pm

PTFlea

PTFlea
Co-Founder
Co-Founder
Riprock wrote:Well, after reading Bob McKenzie's article, I'm almost ready to say that this is a win-win.

Bourque's not terrible as people make him out to be. Give's the Canadiens something Cammalleri (as good as he is) didn't - size. He's on pace for another 27 goals.

Calgary I guess is better off with Cammalleri 0 they are familiar with him, and they wanted a change from Bourque and are hoping for a repeat performance from him.

Montreal also saves about $3M in cap space (giving them ~$8M in [prorated] space now), which means the possibility of making a big move or a few smaller ones.

Don't mind it for Montreal, but is this really the direction they should be taking? Shouldn't they have waiting to get a top prospect - or at least a good prospect + a 1st?

Whatever, for a team that has no direction, it seemed really odd to me that they made this kind of lateral move - but at least it isn't a horrendous move.

Both teams are in for a wakeup call if they think this'll solve their woes.

75Cammalleri Traded - Page 5 Empty Re: Cammalleri Traded on Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:06 pm

Riprock

Riprock
All-Star
All-Star
Montreal and Calgary are both still dung shows... don't get me wrong. While the trade still might look good on paper (at least from how McKenzie lays it out), I still think they panicked and pulled the trigger way too fast. Maybe Cammalleri's negative media attention was scaring Montreal not getting value for him?

76Cammalleri Traded - Page 5 Empty Re: Cammalleri Traded on Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:10 pm

Hoags

Hoags
All-Star
All-Star
Riprock wrote:Montreal and Calgary are both still dung shows... don't get me wrong. While the trade still might look good on paper (at least from how McKenzie lays it out), I still think they panicked and pulled the trigger way too fast. Maybe Cammalleri's negative media attention was scaring Montreal not getting value for him?

They didn't shop Cammalleri around. They could have easily seen what other teams would have offered. That is stupid beyond belief.

Same with the Phaneuf trade, Sutter never shopped around, most GMs didn't even know he was available.

77Cammalleri Traded - Page 5 Empty Re: Cammalleri Traded on Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:29 pm

PTFlea

PTFlea
Co-Founder
Co-Founder
Hoags wrote:
Riprock wrote:Montreal and Calgary are both still dung shows... don't get me wrong. While the trade still might look good on paper (at least from how McKenzie lays it out), I still think they panicked and pulled the trigger way too fast. Maybe Cammalleri's negative media attention was scaring Montreal not getting value for him?

They didn't shop Cammalleri around. They could have easily seen what other teams would have offered. That is stupid beyond belief.

Same with the Phaneuf trade, Sutter never shopped around, most GMs didn't even know he was available.

Exactly this. Why GMs don't let the entire hockey world know these guys are available is beyond me. I'd make sure to call each and every 29 teams to let them know and I'd also leak it to the papers. Diddle it, the decision is made to move him, make a bidding war happen.

78Cammalleri Traded - Page 5 Empty Re: Cammalleri Traded on Fri Jan 13, 2012 4:14 pm

shabbs

shabbs
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
tim1_2 wrote:
Riprock wrote:Well, after reading Bob McKenzie's article, I'm almost ready to say that this is a win-win.

Bourque's not terrible as people make him out to be. Give's the Canadiens something Cammalleri (as good as he is) didn't - size. He's on pace for another 27 goals.

Calgary I guess is better off with Cammalleri 0 they are familiar with him, and they wanted a change from Bourque and are hoping for a repeat performance from him.

Montreal also saves about $3M in cap space (giving them ~$8M in [prorated] space now), which means the possibility of making a big move or a few smaller ones.

But how much "better off"??? Sure, this is an improvement in the short term (cap pain aside), but giving up the 2nd rounder as well? Also, what does this "improvement" get Calgary? MAYBE an 8th seed? And then less prospects in the cupboard.
I think it gets them more chances at winning... and that's needed to get fans in the building. They're dogging it out there. They need a spark. The 2nd rounder... meh. It ain't a first rounder. Bourque is a good asset, big body. Will be curious to see how he does in Montreal. I hope they don't expect him to speak French though. He can't.

Gauthier said this has been in the works for months, but this smells like a deal made very quickly, a knee jerk reaction to what is going on in Montreal.

Sponsored content


Back to top  Message [Page 5 of 6]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum