Speculation: Cammalleri to Vancouver?

[VanillaCoke]

Realistically camm shouldn't come here.
Van shouldn't trade valuable assets aka 1st
CGY can get said assets from some GM in the east.

 

[Lonny Bohonos]

Giving up substantial assets in the vein of high picks/top end prospects/young roster players for a guy whose most attractive asset is that he is 'very available'.

Kinda like buying a fat girl a bunch a drinks at the bar?

 

[Bure All Day]

As a preface to this thread, everyone who has given up on this core is really lame.

If you think this core alone with no additional help is good enough to win in the playoffs, let alone even make the playoffs at this rate, then you have no idea what you're talking about

 

[biturbo19]

Kinda like buying a fat girl a bunch a drinks at the bar?

Exactly.

It might seem like a good idea at the time, but tomorrow you're gonna wish you hadn't.

 

[Cool Hand Goof*]

ehh if they can get him for someone like yaune sauve and a 2nd rnd pick id have no problem with it

 

[Bure All Day]

Exactly.

It might seem like a good idea at the time, but tomorrow you're gonna wish you hadn't.

Buying drinks for a fat chick is never a good idea.

Buying drinks for a hot chick is even rarely a good idea.

 

[Regal]

There's a premium. CGY doesn't have to deal him to a rival at all, and so have to deal with any potential reprecussions. If Cammy is signed long-term here it absolutely affects CGY's near future objectives.

I don't buy it. Even if he's signed long term, Calgary is rebuilding to be a contender in 3-4 years, which is basically as long as Cammalleri will be useful for. Meanwhile they potentially take future prospects that might have helped the Canucks from that point on. The division trade ban is wildly overrated IMO, especially when it's two teams in completely different circumstances.

 

[yoss]

As a preface to this thread, everyone who has given up on this core is really lame.

Despite the fact we just lost to the Florida ****ing Panthers, I second this sentiment.

And yes to Cammalleri. Need more scoring, like his game from what I've seen of him. That's all I got.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

I don't buy it. Even if he's signed long term, Calgary is rebuilding to be a contender in 3-4 years, which is basically as long as Cammalleri will be useful for. Meanwhile they potentially take future prospects that might have helped the Canucks from that point on. The division trade ban is wildly overrated IMO, especially when it's two teams in completely different circumstances.

Montreal was poised to trade Higgins, Grabovski and a 1st for Sundin way back when, failing to do so only because Sundin refused to waive.

That scenario alone should be all that is necessary to dissuade any belief teams will not trade amongst their rivals.

 

[Regal]

Montreal was poised to trade Higgins, Grabovski and a 1st for Sundin way back when, failing to do so only because Sundin refused to waive.

That scenario alone should be all that is necessary to dissuade any belief teams will not trade amongst their rivals.

So two rivals had a deal in place and the only thing that stopped it was a player not wanting to waive his NTC (which he said he wouldn't waive for anyone). I'm not seeing how that proves your point.

 

[Bure All Day]

So two rivals had a deal in place and the only thing that stopped it was a player not wanting to waive his NTC (which he said he wouldn't waive for anyone). I'm not seeing how that proves your point.

if toronto and montreal were willing trade partners, then obviously GMs don't really care that much about inter-division trading

 

[Bleach Clean]

I don't buy it. Even if he's signed long term, Calgary is rebuilding to be a contender in 3-4 years, which is basically as long as Cammalleri will be useful for. Meanwhile they potentially take future prospects that might have helped the Canucks from that point on. The division trade ban is wildly overrated IMO, especially when it's two teams in completely different circumstances.

If you're CGY you try to extract a better amount of futures from a division rival than a comparative trade to the east. Something that affects the conference and the division more should demand more.

Otherwise, what was the hesitation to deal Schneider to the Oilers? If every team is treated equally in trade, why the reluctance to deal him to a division rival.

Old habits die hard. GMs will be very aware that the transaction is in division and will demand compensation to that effect. Cammalleri is still very movable to the east. For CGY to look this way, there has to be incentive.

 

[NYVanfan]

If you think this core alone with no additional help is good enough to win in the playoffs, let alone even make the playoffs at this rate, then you have no idea what you're talking about

i don't agree with this, necessarily
which is to say, i don't think its that black and white
this team has been very good for a long time and is still in the upper echelon ..despite the obvious slump right now. Also, it is very clear that they lack secondary scoring. I don't think we should give up all our futures, but at the same time ... there are 20+ other teams that have foundered along with good players and good picks and never reached the levels the Canucks have in the past 4-5 years or so. A team like the Flames the past few years -- yes, there's an example of a team that was too slow to give it up and start the youth movement. But this team is a playoff team, I firmly believe that. The youth is in much better shape now with Boho, Shink, etc ..I think we can afford to give some up if it means getting a guy like Cammy (and ideally a guy like Ott as well.) You have to take your shots when you can, and hope to re-tool with youth on the fly, like SJS have. But i would not write this year off and say next year is a better time to go for it, as the core will be another year older. Also this year's draft is supposedly not as strong, so if it meant getting a significant piece I wouldnt freak out if we traded our first. I still dont hate the Roy move last year -- just wish we'd done a bit more at the time (and in retrospect it didnt work, but IMO sitting on your hands is the worst option.) Hopefully Luongo plays well in the Olys and can get hot for the playoffs ...and hopefully we get some luck for once ... but IMO you dont throw the baby out w the bathwater ... my $0.02.

 

[Wolfhard]

I'd have ZERO interest in Cammalleri at the price some people are considering in here. Seriously, we just traded Schneider for a 1st round pick, and people want to give up a 1st rounder, PLUS a former 1st/prospect? For an aging 20 goal scorer? Under the assumption that he'll save the team?
He's 31, and he's scored 30+ goals twice in his career. Most recently 5 seasons ago. He's an undersized 2x goal scorer who's likely on the decline and some people are willing to pay a ridiculous price for that.
Kesler scores more than him, and people in here are ready to ditch him for next to nothing.

Sorry, but no...

 

[Just A Bit Outside]

Buying drinks for a fat chick is never a good idea.

Buying drinks for a hot chick is even rarely a good idea.

Depends.

With a fat chick, it will likely atleast lead to getting something.

With a hot chick, it will only lead to wasting money.

All about priorities.

 

[Barney Gumble]

If you're CGY you try to extract a better amount of futures from a division rival than a comparative trade to the east. Something that affects the conference and the division more should demand more.

Otherwise, what was the hesitation to deal Schneider to the Oilers? If every team is treated equally in trade, why the reluctance to deal him to a division rival.

Old habits die hard. GMs will be very aware that the transaction is in division and will demand compensation to that effect. Cammalleri is still very movable to the east. For CGY to look this way, there has to be incentive.

The key point here. IE., who is the GM in Calgary?

 

[Bleach Clean]

I'd have ZERO interest in Cammalleri at the price some people are considering in here. Seriously, we just traded Schneider for a 1st round pick, and people want to give up a 1st rounder, PLUS a former 1st/prospect? For an aging 20 goal scorer? Under the assumption that he'll save the team?
He's 31, and he's scored 30+ goals twice in his career. Most recently 5 seasons ago. He's an undersized 2x goal scorer who's likely on the decline and some people are willing to pay a ridiculous price for that.
Kesler scores more than him, and people in here are ready to ditch him for next to nothing.

Sorry, but no...

I don't much understand the compensation rates here either. Not too long ago, he was traded for a bigger 2nd like forward that had consistency issues (Bourque). Yet here, prime assets like a 1st and former 1st rounder are immediately on the table? It doesn't add up.

Then, one step removed we have the Roy trade, who I think has actually produced better numbers over his career. Same build. Both skilled players. Yet, Roy garnered a 2nd and B prospect from an In-conference deal. Essentially, a late 2nd. Cammalleri makes 2m more than him. Why would he cost so much more?

 

[Bleach Clean]

The key point here. IE., who is the GM in Calgary?

No kidding. Mr. "I can re-write the CBA" is on the other end of the phone here. No way blowhard Burke is going to let Gillis off the hook light if he can manage it.

 

[Vankiller Whale]

Because a bigger forward creates room and can impact a game physically when not scoring. A smaller forward cant do that usually. When they aren't producing, they're just more or less there.

It's why Cammalleri got dealt for a player like Bourque. And this is a well known thought process around the league. Surprised you would venture the question.

It was a rhetorical question. Obviously having a young 6'3 23-year old who us yet to establish himself as an impact player shouldn't make us hesitant to trade for a an actual 6'3 impact player.

Likewise it's very flimsy reasoning to say we shouldn't go after a 5'10 impact forward just because we have a 5'9 23-year old who is not yet an impact player(and is injured to boot)

 

[Bleach Clean]

It was a rhetorical question. Obviously having a young 6'3 23-year old who us yet to establish himself as an impact player shouldn't make us hesitant to trade for a an actual 6'3 impact player.

Likewise it's very flimsy reasoning to say we shouldn't go after a 5'10 impact forward just because we have a 5'9 23-year old who is not yet an impact player(and is injured to boot)

There is no parallel there actually. The bigger player is almost always favoured, while even an impact smaller player will have the stigma of uselessness without production always hanging over his head.

In your hypothetical scenario above, those two smaller forwards double up the propensity to net nothing while they are not scoring. That's why the poster points out this aversion. Or his aversion to compounding the inherent issue.

Anyway, I think he's got a point, adding a Cammalleri only puts the target more squarely on Schroeder's back IMO. There's a threshold for players like this on a team (still a fan of Schroeder though).

 

[Vankiller Whale]

There is no parallel there actually. The bigger player is almost always favoured, while even an impact smaller player will have the stigma of uselessness without production always hanging over his head.

In your hypothetical scenario above, those two smaller forwards double up the propensity to net nothing while they are not scoring. That's why the poster points out this aversion. Or his aversion to compounding the inherent issue.

Anyway, I think he's got a point, adding a Cammalleri only puts the target more squarely on Schroeder's back IMO. There's a threshold for players like this on a team (still a fan of Schroeder though).

What are you talking about? Size has very little to do with how much they do outside of scoring. Look at Kassian, more often than not when he's not scoring he's not playing physical and tends to float or make lazy plays. If anything I think Schroeder is far more consistent in the little things outside of scoring on a regular basis.

I have no clue how having Schroeder in the lineup(even though he's currently injured) somehow makes acquiring Cammalleri a bad idea. If you're saying it's because we're more likely to end up with someone being useless when they're not playing well, then it makes more sense to cite Kassian as a reason not to acquire Cammalleri.

 

[Bure All Day]

i don't agree with this, necessarily
which is to say, i don't think its that black and white
this team has been very good for a long time and is still in the upper echelon ..despite the obvious slump right now. Also, it is very clear that they lack secondary scoring. I don't think we should give up all our futures, but at the same time ... there are 20+ other teams that have foundered along with good players and good picks and never reached the levels the Canucks have in the past 4-5 years or so. A team like the Flames the past few years -- yes, there's an example of a team that was too slow to give it up and start the youth movement. But this team is a playoff team, I firmly believe that. The youth is in much better shape now with Boho, Shink, etc ..I think we can afford to give some up if it means getting a guy like Cammy (and ideally a guy like Ott as well.) You have to take your shots when you can, and hope to re-tool with youth on the fly, like SJS have. But i would not write this year off and say next year is a better time to go for it, as the core will be another year older. Also this year's draft is supposedly not as strong, so if it meant getting a significant piece I wouldnt freak out if we traded our first. I still dont hate the Roy move last year -- just wish we'd done a bit more at the time (and in retrospect it didnt work, but IMO sitting on your hands is the worst option.) Hopefully Luongo plays well in the Olys and can get hot for the playoffs ...and hopefully we get some luck for once ... but IMO you dont throw the baby out w the bathwater ... my $0.02.

I am completely against trading away our prospects/picks this year, as I don't think it would help enough for us to win the Cup anyways.

Buyout Booth in the summer, hopefully we can sign one or more of the better free agents (Gabby, Vanek, Moulson, Vrbata), infuse our youth into the lineup, and hopefully have a better year.

 

[Numbers]

Wouldn't be surprised if it was along the lines of Schroeder + 2nd + Booth

 

[Bleach Clean]

Wouldn't be surprised if it was along the lines of Schroeder + 2nd + Booth

That would make sense as it keeps the quotient of that type of player on the team at 1. Some people have a hard time grasping this, but I'm betting it would be a consideration for the team. There's only so many players of this type that should be on a team at any one point. Sending Schroeder along in the same deal alleviates that concern.

 

[CCF23]

If you're CGY you try to extract a better amount of futures from a division rival than a comparative trade to the east. Something that affects the conference and the division more should demand more.

Otherwise, what was the hesitation to deal Schneider to the Oilers? If every team is treated equally in trade, why the reluctance to deal him to a division rival.

Old habits die hard. GMs will be very aware that the transaction is in division and will demand compensation to that effect. Cammalleri is still very movable to the east. For CGY to look this way, there has to be incentive.

There's a big difference between trading a 27 year old goaltender to a team that (with a goalie) was supposed to be ready to start taking major steps towards being a contender and trading a 31 year old forward while you're still a few years away from contending.

Trading Schneider to the Oilers was dangerous because of the perception that it would help make them dangerous now and in the immediate future when we're still trying to compete. We're not going to help put one more potential obstacle between us and winning.

For Calgary, it's a much different situation with Cammalleri. That team is in the infancy of its rebuild. It makes no difference to them whether they make us better short term or not, as they're not ready to compete with us while Cammalleri would be here anyway. It's actually probably attractive to them to weaken our future assets and potentially make us a bit weaker than we would've been if/when Calgary starts to put together something resembling a winning team a couple years down the line.

It's a pretty simple difference that makes the scenarios completely different.