Ryan Kesler to be a Flyer if Canucks don't match offer
The Philadelphia Flyers have signed Vancouver Canucks restricted free agent forward Ryan Kesler to an offer sheet. The deal is worth $1.9 million for one season.
The Vancouver Canucks have seven days to match this offer, but if they choose to walk away for financial reasons, they will receive a second round draft pick.
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=177269&hubname=nhl and
http://www.philadelphiaflyers.com/pressbox/archive/2695.aspThe Canucks only have about $2.3 million to spend under the salary cap, making Kesler’s offer sheet difficult to match unless they make a trade.
My speculation is that Clarke is trying to push Nonis around. Clarke really wants Naslund, and is willing to trade Gagne, but Nonis wants Carter in the trade and in return he’ll add Kesler. Clarke wouldn’t part with both superstars, so now he’s trying to force Nonis’s hand. I like it.
68 Responses to Ryan Kesler to be a Flyer if Canucks don't match offer
Leave a Reply
You must be to post a comment.
lol i think its pretty funny how idiotic you sound. the flyers offered kesler 1.9 because if they offered him any more they go from giving up a second round pick to giving up a first and a third. they have around 4 mil in cap room with primeau gone, so its not that he cant afford it, he just didnt feel kesler was worth a first round pick.
if your a GM, and the only reason you sign a player is to make sure another team doesnt get him, your doin a shitty job.
other GM’s are not going to not trade with the flyers due to this. whats stopping a team like colorado, who doesnt care about vancouvers woes from trading? why would other GM’s sacrifice the good of there team in order to blackball clarke? i mean, isnt a trade supposed to benifit both teams? so basically what your saying is i wont benifit my team if the time comes bc clarke was a big meanie!! if thats your GM’s position, then have fun at the bottom of the standings..
and i bet your thinkin “wow i cant wait for richards and carter to be RFA’s”.. good for you. if clarke doesnt resign them before they have enough time to get other offers, then go ahead and offer them rediculous contracts to blackball us. then clarke lets them go, takes your first round picks, and laugh’s in your face when your cap issued with a 7 million dollar 4th year player. someone on TSN posted something that made all the montreal fans look bad, saying “god montreal should have offered gagne 8 million, that’ll show clarke.” im almost positive clarke would have walked, taken the 4 first round picks, and traded 3 of them for like the rights to zherdev or someone else promising.
basically the moral of the story is, clarke did not screw himself at all. its a win win situation. we either get kesler, or we dont nd vancouver is screwed. this wont have the rediculous repercussions everyone is talking about, bc if a gm wants to ruin there team to get back at clarke, so be it, your loss.
Cry all you want, but he did nothing wrong, ethically or legally he was within his rights to do what he did. Does this drive up the price for a 10 goal scorer, I don’t see how. You can only spend so much. If he wants to spend 2 mil on a 10 goal a year guy he has every right. When that guy turns around and scores 30+ the next season or wins the Selke Award then what will you say?
What will you say when Ryan outscores Havlat and Havlat is sitting at home ( for some stupid biting or scratching incident ) while Ryan and his teammates or still playing?
I like this action and totally agree with his comments in the recent TSN article.
His last quote was the best.
“A lot of guys in this league like the rules when it suits them and they don’t like them when it doesn’t. Too bad for them. I’m just playing by the rules that are there. To be honest, I’m surprised more teams aren’t doing it.”
That’s because the rest of the GM’s don’t have the Brass one’s you do Bob. Great Job and keep up the good work, WE LUV YA MAN!
Like I said, I like the move…
I hope for his sake that the other GM’s don’t form another unwritten rule about not trading or dealing with Clarke and being perfectly willing to go after his RFA’s
I really hope this opens up the floodgates.
Pre-cap era, yeah, I’ve heard that, but it’s a new game now! There’s not the same threat of salary inflation…at least, there is a limit at the end of the day.
I’m no Flyers fan, but if Clarke did it just to screw the Canucks, then good for him. Use whatever tricks you’ve got.
Player salaries are completely skewed, and no offer sheet is going to screw up arbitration or negotiations any more than they already are. Comparables? What 3 comparable players make the same money at any skill level? Timing and supply set salaries more than skill.
I just wonder how many teams are going to have to walk on arbitration results (and those players signing for less money elsewhere) before they retune that system.
Uh uh, so the other GMs are going to take the kid gloves off?
Please…
If this type of thing forces GMs to use every edge they can get, great! It’s not like another team can just outspend you…
They’re not going to trade with the Flyers because Clarke’s not a nice guy?
I’d like to see a GM step down just because the new NHL is too cutthroat for him
How could things get worse? The cap is the cap, and unlike last year, there are a lot fewer teams with a ton of cap space to burn.
44 million to spend, and what, 23 roster spots? I don’t even know, but regardless it’s the same for everyone.
blackball Clarke, yeah right. If he offers a trade that makes your team better, you’re going to take it. That will never change.
yay!
*applause*
Finally. I couldn’t agree more
again, I completely agree
True of the typical simplistic, the first deportment of the unapprised is banter, which inevitably falls on the educated deaf ears. You may insult until you are blue, but it only makes your points look just more invalid and makes you look childish. That is assuming you are in fact past your childhood.
From your ghastly spelling and your neglecting of assimilating several sentences, I wondered if it is even worth a response, but certainly there will be others who will benefit, hence my response.
To “afford” does not strictly relate to monetary compensation. The Flyers could not afford to give a player of Kesler’s abilities much more than the $1.9M not just because of financial reasons, but also because of compensation issues, as you point out. They both are of consequence. But in the end, Clarke knew well he was not going to pull it off (either that or he is truly an idiot who after all this time has yet to understand how GMs have done business all that time). Hence his only possible outcome was to, as you pu it, screw Vancouver. And what is the purpose in that? Clarke was not a “meanie” in any sense of the word. He was an idiot incapable of comprehending the true future repercussions he will endure.
The GM community and the owners circle of the NHL is most certainly a “good ol’ boys” club, and as such, certain behavior is expected just as much as other practices are implicitly barred, even if available to all. The courtesy of negotiating room is one of those among GMs, especially when timing is critical. When courtesy rules are dishonored, the reaction is isolation and reprisal, even at the expense of minor damage done to the one’s self organization. It simply is the way things are presently done and have been done for many decades. Therefore reprisal against the Flyers is assured and not just from the Canucks.
It is quite simplistic (and reflective of your fragile x) for you to think that doing what Clarke has just done as retaliation would be what I would yearn for your dear ol’ Bobby. I have in fact written to the opposite on this and several other sites on the subject, because in the end is counterproductive to all teams and would end up damaging everyone. The best punishment for Clarke is barring him from trading across the board. That would tie the hands of the Flyers only, and ultimately would get Clarke fired because of his ineffectiveness. And it would hardly affect the rest of the teams, because they would still have 28 other teams to do trades with, so the impact would be minimal to the league, but catastrophic to the Flyers, and that is a small price to pay for any one organization in order to give a show of solidarity against a moron who got one too many cross checks to the head.
In the end whether Clarke will fill the reprisal or not, is up to the other GMs. But so far, not one has come to Clarke’s rescue, and all of them have been insulted by his actions, and his words. Not only did he do wrong, but he bragged about it and publicly said he thinks little of their opinions or sentiments. Truly the smart thing to do, without a doubt…if you are looking to pick a fight. Clarke was stupid, and whether he cares or not is another thing, but he was still stupid at trying to pull this move and in the way he tried it.
The cap is the cap is too simplistic to look at it. It is all a matter of league wide revenues, otherwise they would have not spent over 100 pages in the CBA in order to iron out and define how and what was to be taken into account in the cap.
And the problem is that in the future if overall revenues do not escalate at the same rate or faster than player salaries you will end up with an unhealthy imparity between players and the league, even worse than there was before. You actually run many risks in the teams, including the possibility of having the top elite players overextend their worth, while the rest of the rosters are filled with low entry and quality players, instead of a mostly balanced level of skills in the rosters. The cap, salaries and ramifications of both is quite a complicated subject. In short, it is not healthy for all 30 teams for the player salaries to escalate too quickly, as Clarke’s move is prompting.
As far as blackballing, you are correct, a trade that is highly beneficial to one self will come into effect, but you have to realize that those trades are not the vast majority. With most of them being marginal trades, or “tweaks” to the rosters. And in those marginal instances since not much rides on those moves, GMs in theory could simply bar Clarke from making trades, unless they are highly beneficial to the other GMs. And after all, they have 28 other GMs they can trade with, so putting one specifically to the side, is highly inconsequential.
lol im sorry but by saying insults make me look childish and my point invalid, and then going on to insult me.. i guess thats a bit hypocritical. but i still got my point across, because someone agreed. and im sorry if i didnt spell check my post, i was running a little late to class.
… but hey thanks for the response, bc like i said before it makes me realize how idiotic i think your being by saying GM’s wont trade with them bc of it. your right, there is 28 other teams, but how many of them sided with vancouver? i saw only 2 or 3 gms that remained unnamed in the article on TSN, thats it. im sure teams in vancouvers division dont really care either, but hey who knows right?
basically in a nutshell this is how i feel:
clarke made a ballsy move in going after an RFA. he liked kesler, he made an offer for him earlier in the summer. he saw his chance and he took it. he felt kesler was worth 1.9, so he gave it to him. i guess it sucks for vancouver then, but they obviously feel hes worth it if there going to counter the offer. wheres the harm?
when a team doesnt trade with the flyers bc they made a group II RFA from another team an offer, please let me know (i didnt plan on it, but look how stupid that statement looks). if a GM passes up on an opportunity to imporve his team (wether minimal or not, any trade is made to improve your team so i dont buy your arguement) then he should be fired.
i guess the last thing i saw in your post was how you mentioned what you felt the best punishment for clarke was.
…tell me, whats he being punished for? the fact that he followed the guidelines and made an offer? nah i dont think so. i mean, when carolina made an offer for sergie federov in 98, they were barred from trade right? oh, thats right they werent. same when the flyers made an offer for chris gratton, nothing happened. i guess the gentlemens club you mentioned wasnt around 8 years ago.
let them offer richards 8 million bc if they have that much room under the cap there probably a basement team, and we’ll take there 4 first round picks all the way to the bank
Your point is not validated by someone having the same sentiments. Your point is valid so long as the argument is rational, and your rational is simply too narrow minded and ignoring the media reports.
You seem of the notion that this is my sole view and take on Clarke’s move. It is not. It just so happen that I do agree with the GMs that are avidly (and anonimously for PR reasons) talking to the press about the incident. I merely reflect the overwhelming reports of the GMs feelings, sentiments, and planed actions. Even Clarke himself has acknoledge in the press that the other GMs are complaining and talking about the incident with their rational as to why it was wrong.
In fact, at this point, there are GMs daily on the phone with Nonis telling him he has already wasted too much time in signing Kesler, to go ahead and do it immediately, and that they plan on retaliating on Clarke. And when I said no trades, that is what they are saying, no trades. At all. I do not believe they will actually not make trades at all, but I suspect that unless they are highly favorable to the other GM and not so to Clarke, that they do mean so. It goes beyond RFAs.
Perhaps the media reports you are reading are highly biased towards the Flyers? I have purposedly looked at more than 10 different media outlets (although none to be biased for the Flyers) and they are all are reporting the same reactions from the other GMs. To simply ignore their sentiment and their input to the mass media is incredibly obtuse.
If Clarke had in fact not done something that would upset the other 29 GMs, we would not be talking about this at all. So if you want answers as to what Clarke has done so wrong and you have not grasped them by my related posts, it is apparent that you are simply not willing to assimilate the information. Therefore I suggest you read the media reports on the sentiments of the other GMs. If you do not understand their sentiments then, I do not know what other recourse you have.
By the way, the Gratton situation was inflamating, but it hardly can compared to a system with a cap, as it is now. Back then matching was a matter of ensuring locking the financial backing, if any was necessary. Now you have situations that are much more sensitive, like Vancouver’s $1M cap space after matching the Kesler offer. Back then it was viewed as just a dumb move, mostly, but now the GMs obviously feel much more animate about it. In fact, I would not be surprised if the next CBA puts further compensation than the existing one for RFAs offers after all of it is said and done. Of course, they will have to tangle with the NHLPA to get that one through first, so it is easier said than done, but I can bet that the very minimum it will be discussed.
A cease fire from what? theirs been 3 offer sheets in the last 10 years? 15 maybe….
Hes just using the rules as they are stated, nothing wrong with that.
you know what, i agree with what your saying to an extent when you word it like this. i have in fact read the reports about other GM’s saying to lock up kesler, but i havent seen any quotes about them saying there not trading with the flyers… please give me a link. in addition, i dont think you can assume all the gm’s feel this way… because none are goin on record saying they arent trading with the flyers.. but i get where your coming from. i feel like this is going to become a common practice, taking a page from a previous article, this happens all the time in the NFL and is considered a good business move.. why not the NHL?
but please, i dont mean this as a knock at all but show me a link of a GM saying there not gonna trade, i want to see it
Watch the video articles from TSN on the subject. A link is not possible, they are scripts. TSN
Assuming all GMs will treat Clarke the same is pretentious, but the indicators are that not one has come to Clarke’s defense and the reaction has been all negative. If Clarke has allies thus far, they certainly are keeping a really tight lip.
I have yet to actually read a single quote from a GM, all have been paraphrased and as with such instances there is some degree of reading between the lines, which I did interpret as “no trades” when the trading is mentioned. Of course, I could be wrong, but what kind of punishment can be given in trading other than not trading? It is a derivative, is it not?
Pulling out an extreme example does nothing to make your arguement stronger.
The effects of Clarke’s move, if there are *any* effects will be more subtle.
We have a cap, so no teams are going to go out there and way overpay… they simply can’t.
A more reasonable scenario is that a team has one or two number 4-6 D-men, or an experienced backup goalie or a 2nd-4th line forward. That team is up against the cap, with a few players to sign. They may be playing hardball with these guys and it might be a real number crunch of just a couple hundredK.
Along comes another team, and signs them to an offer sheet that is just a little more than team A wants to spend. The first team has to match… and that *little* extra difference is actually pretty important as it gets them a little too close, or even just over, the cap.
That is what Clarke did to Vancouver here. It was not a *huge* deal, but it hurts Vancouver to have to match.
Whether the floodgates open or not, one thing that this does do is it makes all Clarke’s RFA’s free game.
My guess is nothing happens one way or the other. I wish it would. It would be interesting to actually see RFA’s in play in the off-season.