An explanation of the Stralman deal by way of a Hypothetical Conversation
by Kent Wilson on Sep 28, 2009 9:11 PM PDT
Email
Print
We all know Darryl Sutter loves having excess defensemen. We also know the Columbus Blue Jackets were in desperate need of some talent on the blueline. So we can therefore conclude that the deal that sent Stralman to Columbus for a middling lottery ticket was initiated by Howson, not Sutter. Following is my attempt to predict the exchange between the two GM's:
Howson: Hey Darryl! Glad I caught you. How's Calgary at this time of year?
Sutter: ....to be quite honest.........fine.
Howson: Uh, that's good. How was camp this year? I see you beat the Oilers again the other nig...
Sutter: Get to the point.
Howson: Right. The point. As you probably know, we tried hard as hell to sign someone worth a damn for the back-end this summer and got nothing. We've got Skoula here in camp, but the guy is past his best before date, you know what I mean? Anyways, I was looking over your roster the other day and noticed you guys are blessed with a few extra defensemen...
Sutter: We're happy with our back-end, Scott.
Howson: Right, right...granted of course. But here's the thing. It looks to me like you're going to have to send at least one of those guys to the farm in the next few days. Through waivers, no less. And the truth of the matter is, we'll probably claim whoever you send down.
Sutter: We're thinking Kronwall........Quite honest, you can have him.
Howson: Good choice, good choice, Stralman has the higher upside, for sure. I sent some scouts your way recently and they had some nice things to say about that kid.
Sutter: He's going to be sticking around. Take Kronwall.
Howson: We will if you send him down. Here's the thing though...we'd rather deal for Stralman than claim Kronwall. But, if the second guy goes on waivers, we'll scoop him anyways. Better than nothing. Here's the thing of it though...we like the looks of some of your other youngsters as well. In fact, we plan to target any other waiver eligible defensemen you expose to the wire during the season. Share and share alike, right?
Sutter: Unless I trade you Stralman now I assume.
Howson: Now we're talking.You don't have a lot of draft picks next year do you?
Sutter:.....Second rounder.
Howson: Fourth.
Sutter: Third.
Howson: Deal.
10 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
the way strålman showed in camp, he would have very likely been claimed on waivers.
and i have to admit, 0% of his salary vs. 50% of his salary is a no-brainer.
If he would have been claimed outright on the way down, Columbus would have paid the whole shot. It’s only re-entry waivers where the Flames would have to eat half of his ticket and take the cap hit. I have no doubt he would have been claimed, but, frankly, I’d have let ‘em have Kronwall, and the only other waiver-eligible D-man worth a crap on the farm is Palin. My objection to the deal is more that the Flames could stand to re-balance the prospect pool a bit, so I guess I would have been looking for a live body up front. I’ll certainly grant that sort of approach might have necessitated a bigger deal than Calgary wanted to make right now, and if Pelech can progress through the next year or so, they may make a deal with Sarich as the bait down the road.
by Robert Cleave on Sep 28, 2009 9:40 PM PDT up reply actions
Sum Total?
So what does that Primeau trade end up being afterall?
Primeau and a 2nd rounder for
Stuart and a 3rd rounder
Is that right?
So basically that salary dump only cost us a 1 round drop in the draft. Would we have been able to keep the rest of the team in tact without that $1.4M shaving?
And we also got a guy (Stuart) who looks like a semi-useful farmer/call-up. Sorry to see Stralman go after the good reviews he was getting in camp, but if that had been the complete trade last month, it’d be chalked it up as another great move by Sutter.
PS. Great post Kent. That was my thoughts exactly, only you expressed it much more cleverly than I could.
I think the Flames got a 7th rounder in there as well.
I give full marks to Sutter for moving Primeau for just about anything given his salary. That said, dealing what is obviously an NHL player with upside at 23 years old for a 3rd round draft pick (which is a <20% chance at an NHLer) is a step back. Which is why I’m trying to find the angle this move makes sense from a Flames perspective. Of course, I may not have all the information.
Incidentally, I don’t really consider Stuart worth anything: he’s a dime a dozen player who is freely available throughout the league and internally replaceable besides.
by Kent Wilson on Sep 28, 2009 10:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Bah!
I just got off the horn (apparently just like Darryl) with my old man a few hours ago. We spent a half hour sprinkling compliments on the Flames D-Core and Stralman in particular.
I would have loved the deal for a 2nd rounder (two 2nd round picks could move you up in a hurry if necessary in June), but am not overwhelmed by the return of a 3rd rounder.
Just to put a 3rd rounder in perspective, John Negrin was a 3rd rounder in 07 and looks to be a year or two away. Brandon Prust and Dustin Boyd were also 3rd rounders in 04 who have become regulars in the past few years, the rest of the 10 third round selections that the Flames have made (since the ’03 Draft) are miles from NHL hockey.
(Armstrong, Ryder, Marvin, Bouma, Howse, Baldwin, Donnely)
Better than losing him for nothing, but…….
"It's a great day for hockey" - BBJ
by jealous broadcaster on Sep 28, 2009 11:15 PM PDT reply actions
Nice attempt.
That’s probably close to how it went down. This morning the Stralman deal still makes no sense to me.
Spreading that Calgary Flames, Montreal Expos, The U, and Orlando Magic love.
LUNDMARK WAIVERS
Eklund is stating the Coyotes have claimed a veteran center. Whether or not he’s right, would Jamie Lundmark be considered a veteran?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Northwest Standings
Flames Schedule
Next 5 Games
@
Anaheim
|
Mon 02/06 | 7:00 PM PST |
|
@
San Jose
|
Wed 02/08 | 7:00 PM PST |
|
@
Phoenix
|
Thu 02/09 | 6:00 PM PST |
|
Vancouver
|
Sat 02/11 | 7:00 PM PST |
|
Toronto
|
Tue 02/14 | 6:00 PM PST |
Last 5 Games
|
Chicago
|
Fri 02/03 | W 3 - 1 |
|
Detroit
|
Tue 01/31 | L 1 - 3 |
|
San Jose
|
Tue 01/24 | L 0 - 1 |
|
@
Edmonton
|
Sat 01/21 | W 6 - 2 |
|
@
Los Angeles
|
Thu 01/19 | SO - W 2 - 1 |
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Friday’s Three Stars: Brassard wins it for Blue Jackets in overtime; Halak blanks Kings
- Puck Previews: Blues host Kings in first game after break; Blackhawks’ road struggles
- Best barometer of the St. Louis Blues’ success? Gifts from political lobbyists
- ‘Scott Gomez Can’t Put Anything In’: The ‘Hey Jude’ of Scott Gomez protest songs (Video)
- Puck Headlines: Jimmy Howard’s injury; top 50 players; drinking beer out of hockey skate (yuck)
Latest stories and headlines from NHL.com
- WHL Roundup: A look at Friday's games
- Gabriel and Leipsic two goals each as the Winterhawks defeat the Silvertips 7-3
- Feser solidifies Americans win with two empty-net goals against the Thunderbirds
- Holberg scores winner in shootout as the Chiefs beat the Royals 6-5
- Brown makes 26 saves to lead the Rockets over the Cougars 2-1
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
