[Signing] Flames sign Joakim Nordstrom

[Monty]

1 minute ago, Patrick Kane said:

Your argument is he's a C that can't win faceoffs. Wrong. He's a LW. Don't make a mockery of yourself, it's embarrassing.

I mean, it's kinda funny though.

[Dazzle]

Just now, Patrick Kane said:

 

That was when he was 21/22 years old, covering for injuries. Once he's solidified his spot on the NHL, he has consistently played LW the past 7-8 seasons.

 

Your argument is he's a C that can't win faceoffs. Wrong. He's a LW. Don't make a mockery of yourself, it's embarrassing.

 

And now you're getting angry bringing up the Cab driver incident. 

Except he's drafted as a Center, played as a centre. Took a lot more faceoffs than Hawrluk, which is who I was comparing it to. Both are depth signings, but Hawrluk has a better sample with regards to faceoffs.

 

We can fairly see that Hawrluk CAN fill in for faceoff duties, if need be.

[Dazzle]

Just now, Monty said:

I mean, it's kinda funny though.

What?

[oldnews]

12 hours ago, theo5789 said:

I guess the question is does Seattle simply want a player that can help them for one year and who knows how many more years left after? They could go with a younger option who may not be as good now, but holds more value in the future whether through development or in a trade.

 

I brought those names up because that poster brought them up as "dead cap" being moved and I was simply pointing out the cost to move that dead cap. I think this situation would be more like Fleury who Pittsburgh wanted to guarantee that they took him despite being a good goaltender for cap reasons. Only now the cap issues are magnified with the flat cap. If Calgary wants to relieve cap by hoping Giordano gets taken, then it's going to cost them significant assets to do so and lose a decent, but no longer Norris calibre dman. Seattle isn't doing them any favours.

 

If Calgary does pay to move him, it also shows that they are indeed having cap/structural issues that need to be resolved and they are willing to pay to make it happen. Something that the poster I responded to also claims that they have no issue of either through slick management.

He's not dead cap though - not even remotely close (you may as well refer to Edler as "dead cap" = that might even be less inappropriate) - the hypothetical of 'paying to move him' strikes me so far off base - as do those comparables, that don't help make the point.  Would Seattle pass on him in favour of a young player/future - possibly - who knows.  Or they might take him and flip him as a rental - one that could seriously bolster any contender - would cost a pro-rated post deadline cap hit in the 2 or less million range - and could probably bring back one hell of a return assuming he remains anywhere near the player he's been - so it's not a foregone (if Calgary would even consider exposing him).

Why would Calgary be perceived to be in 'cap trouble'?  They have 3+ million of space - they have no one particularly significant expiring next offseason - Ryan, Bennet, Dube, Nordstrom, Valimaki = who among them would command much more cap or be irreplaceable on any UFA market.

I'm not seeing it.   Giordano is a #1D.  He's one of the last players in the league I'd refer to / or even imply is 'dead cap'.

Edited October 20, 2020 by oldnews

[theo5789]

10 minutes ago, oldnews said:

He's not dead cap though - not even remotely close (you may as well refer to Edler as "dead cap" = that might even be less inappropriate) - the hypothetical of 'paying to move him' strikes me so far off base - as do those comparables, that don't help make the point.  Would Seattle pass on him in favour of a young player/future - possibly - who knows.  Or they might take him and flip him as a rental - one that could seriously bolster any contender - would cost a pro-rated post deadline cap hit in the 2 or less million range - and could probably bring back one hell of a return assuming he remains anywhere near the player he's been - so it's not a foregone (if Calgary would even consider exposing him).

Why would Calgary be perceived to be in 'cap trouble'?  They have 3+ million of space - they have no one particularly significant expiring next offseason - Ryan, Bennet, Dube, Nordstrom, Valimaki = who among them would command much more cap or be irreplaceable on any UFA market.

I'm not seeing it.   Giordano is a #1D.  He's one of the last players in the league I'd refer to / or even imply is 'dead cap'.

I never referred to him as "dead cap". I responded to a poster that was saying "dead cap" could easily be moved during expansion. I was simply responding to that and saying the cost will likely be more now than before.

 

Like I said, I compare this scenario similarly to MAF where Pittsburgh paid (a 2nd round pick) to ensure he would be taken despite him likely being the best goalie option anyway. Giordano may be concluded to be a reasonable option, but there's no doubt that if Calgary exposes him (if they don't then likely Tanev and Kylington are exposed on D) that either it's for cap reasons or they feel like he wouldn't be taken if he had a "poor" season. If he continues to play well, then Calgary will have to make that decision whether to keep him themselves.

 

They have 3+ million currently and they still need to sign a dman (Kylington) and another forward just to dress the bare minimum. If they expect extras, they likely won't hit the full 23 man roster unless someone is moved or hits LTIR. Again, the poster that I responded felt it would be easy to clear cap through expansion by having Seattle take Giordano (or Lucic which that poster believed as well). Why the need to clear cap through expansion if they have no issue? I just felt it was contradictory.

[AV.]

9 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

I never referred to him as "dead cap". I responded to a poster that was saying "dead cap" could easily be moved during expansion. I was simply responding to that and saying the cost will likely be more now than before.

 

Like I said, I compare this scenario similarly to MAF where Pittsburgh paid (a 2nd round pick) to ensure he would be taken despite him likely being the best goalie option anyway. Giordano may be concluded to be a reasonable option, but there's no doubt that if Calgary exposes him (if they don't then likely Tanev and Kylington are exposed on D) that either it's for cap reasons or they feel like he wouldn't be taken if he had a "poor" season. If he continues to play well, then Calgary will have to make that decision whether to keep him themselves.

 

They have 3+ million currently and they still need to sign a dman (Kylington) and another forward just to dress the bare minimum. If they expect extras, they likely won't hit the full 23 man roster unless someone is moved or hits LTIR. Again, the poster that I responded felt it would be easy to clear cap through expansion by having Seattle take Giordano (or Lucic which that poster believed as well). Why the need to clear cap through expansion if they have no issue? I just felt it was contradictory.

I didn't really say that.  I said, or meant to say, the option was there for them to take if they felt they were in a cap crunch as they could probably get one of those guys to "go" to Seattle (by including additional assets).

[Master Mind]

3 hours ago, Dazzle said:

Lmfao, what's hilarious is that you are the one getting it wrong. Read and weep @Zfetch.

 

This was the very first result on Google. Did you even look him up at all?

 

https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=127777

 

Joakim Nordstrom

Center -- shoots L
Born Feb 25 1992 -- Stockholm, Sweden
[28 yrs. ago]
Height 6.01 -- Weight 194 [185 cm/88 kg]

 

--

 

Let's say you missed it. Wikipedia has a blurb on the side of Google.

 

Joakim Nordström is a Swedish professional ice hockey centre who is currently playing for the Calgary Flames of the National Hockey League.

 

--

 

How about Elite Prospects?

 

https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/18332/joakim-nordstrom

 

"A skilled two-way center with pretty quick feet an puckhandling skills. Nordström is also smart, both with and without the puck and a valuable team player. Must add more muscles and strength."

 

--

 

And finally, NHL.com lists him as a centre

 

https://www.nhl.com/player/joakim-nordstrom-8475807

 

C | 6' 1" | 194 lb | Age: 28 | Calgary Flames

 

--

 

Sit down @Zfetch You ain't MLK, you fraud.

 

@Alain VigneaultI'm surprised jazz didn't fact check, but I'm not surprised that this guy blindly agreed with you.  LOL.

Note that elite prospects list him as C/LW, indicating he's capable of playing both, but following his NHL career shows he's prominently played at LW.

 

A shame hockeydb has him just as C, normally they're pretty good.

 

I certainly wouldn't trust wikipedia on this. After all, they had Eichel listed as GM of the Sabres, and Dubois as owner of the Leafs 

 

Sadly, you can't trust NHL's positions, as there are always many inaccuracies there.

 

As someone who works in the industry, I can assure you that there's a lot of misinformation about player positions out there.

[AV.]

Lol wtf is this thread right now?

 

FFS, do we need to bring in Bill Peters and Bruce Cassidy to explain that Nordstrom is a winger?

Edited October 20, 2020 by Alain Vigneault

[Ilya Mikheyev]

2 hours ago, Dazzle said:

But to counter your point, Joakim Nordstrom's career faceoffs (and he is closer to 200+) have indicated that he isn't great on faceoffs, my original point. Although Hawryluk has taken fewer faceoffs, he still took nearly 70 faceoffs. Therefore, in a pinch, you have a more RELIABLE faceoff option than Nordstrom.

 

It is actually very valid critique when comparing both players for the above reasons I mentioned. So I think Hawryluk is a better option for the Canucks.

 

Additionally, the fact that Nordstrom's contract for 700,000 appears to be one way, versus Hawryluk's two way contract gives the Canucks flexibility for cap. I think it's a far more shrewd of a signing.

I actually agree with you that Hawryluk is a better fit for the Canucks - mostly because they already have enough LWers in Roussel, Pearson, Miller & Motte (...and Eriksson at times...) whereas the RW positions are pretty much all competitive outside of Boeser's. Nordstrom is probs a better fit for the Flames IMO and is a very solid role player, esp for the price. (And I don't think either's faceoff ability has anything to do with it haha). Capwise it's nearly a wash as either player would have to pass thru waivers before receiving their minor league salary, and neither is waiver exempt.

[theo5789]

12 minutes ago, Alain Vigneault said:

I didn't really say that.  I said, or meant to say, the option was there for them to take if they felt they were in a cap crunch as they could probably get one of those guys to "go" to Seattle (by including additional assets).

And Lucic has a NMC, it won't matter what additional assets can be moved if he isn't willing to waive it.

 

As for Giordano, it's two scenarios. Either he's still playing at top 4 D level and Calgary pays a smaller sweetener while losing a capable dman (not sure why they would do this if they didn't have cap issues) or he's dropped off where Calgary is hoping he gets taken in which case the price to do so is much higher. Seattle isn't going to take the risk of a 38 year old bouncing back to higher levels. Even if they go with the rental route to try and gain assets later on, it requires Giordano to be performing at a level that is worth it for them to do so which would be the conundrum for Calgary to let their captain go while still playing at a high level. This seems like it's only a consideration if they are really in a bind, which doesn't seem to be case as you're alluding to.

[Qwags]

Not a bad signing. Wonder if he can play C?

[Dazzle]

44 minutes ago, Master Mind said:

Note that elite prospects list him as C/LW, indicating he's capable of playing both, but following his NHL career shows he's prominently played at LW.

 

A shame hockeydb has him just as C, normally they're pretty good.

 

I certainly wouldn't trust wikipedia on this. After all, they had Eichel listed as GM of the Sabres, and Dubois as owner of the Leafs 

 

Sadly, you can't trust NHL's positions, as there are always many inaccuracies there.

 

As someone who works in the industry, I can assure you that there's a lot of misinformation about player positions out there.

The Wikipedia example was just to point out how "accessible" the information was, but I sourced other links, INCLUDING NHL.com (an official source) as well as a scouting report that solidifies the idea of Nordstrom being a center, who was probably moved to wing at some point.

 

Just because they're drafted at a position doesn't necessarily mean they'll stay that way. Remember when Pettersson was bad with faceoffs? He was moved to the wing so that Horvat could win the faceoffs.

This is just a quick and dirty example of how players can move depending on deployment. That's also why they got Miller to do the faceoffs/centering duties so that Pettersson can focus on being a winger.

Edited October 20, 2020 by Dazzle

[Master Mind]

2 hours ago, Dazzle said:

The Wikipedia example was just to point out how "accessible" the information was, but I sourced other links, INCLUDING NHL.com (an official source) as well as a scouting report that solidifies the idea of Nordstrom being a center, who was probably moved to wing at some point.

 

Just because they're drafted at a position doesn't necessarily mean they'll stay that way. Remember when Pettersson was bad with faceoffs? He was moved to the wing so that Horvat could win the faceoffs.

This is just a quick and dirty example of how players can move depending on deployment. That's also why they got Miller to do the faceoffs/centering duties so that Pettersson can focus on being a winger.

Yes, of course players can be moved around. I still wouldn't rely on Wikipedia as a source of info on a player's position, likewise with NHL.

 

Regardless, you classified him as a centre, when he is mainly a LW. Surely the Flames are aware of this, and brought him in to be a LW.

[Ilya Mikheyev]

3 hours ago, Qwags said:

Not a bad signing. Wonder if he can play C?

i almost replied tbh

[Dazzle]

20 minutes ago, Master Mind said:

Yes, of course players can be moved around. I still wouldn't rely on Wikipedia as a source of info on a player's position, likewise with NHL.

 

Regardless, you classified him as a centre, when he is mainly a LW. Surely the Flames are aware of this, and brought him in to be a LW.

But the issue wasn't that he wasn't just about him being a center or left wing, which I've already proven from multiple reputable sites that point to him being a center. My argument was that Hawrluk was a BETTER signing than Nordstrom because of the fact that Hawrluk has a better faceoff percentage than Nordstrom. This means that Hawrluk has that flexibility to be a centre if need be. We've also seen the body of work that Nordstrom has done as a center, and I do believe he is inferior in that regard.

 

It's a fair comparison BECAUSE they are both listed as centers, making similar salaries. Nothing more, nothing less. People really need to read what is written rather than jumping too quickly on voting their friends. It's pretty sad actually. Look at the same people who replied to me voting for people who posted against me, even though they didn't actually look at what was written.

Edited October 20, 2020 by Dazzle

[PistolPete13]

20 hours ago, The Lock said:

First of all, Fleury was literally featured in the Vegas expansion draft as one of the sought after players they wanted. He even showed up at the expansion draft to be featured. That's literally the opposite of "dead cap" when they clearly wanted the player.

 

Second, you can name off of as many "dead caps" as you want but the most common thing they all have is they are on the LTIR. Eriksson's not in this category so if you're trying to compare something like Eriksson so Clarkson, it's not even close since Clarkson doesn't count against the cap once he's on LTIR whereas Eriksson's not exactly injured.

 

If anything Ferland's contract would be easier to move since he'll likely be on LTIR. That would be a more fair comparison but it doesn't really matter if he's moved or not for us if he's not even on our caphit.

 

You have to compare the right contracts dude and not just throw random contracts on the table.

There was bound to be some criticism of JB at some point in this thread. 

I was just about to post.....in before someone posts something like where’s dimjim  in all of this?

[Master Mind]

1 hour ago, Dazzle said:

But the issue wasn't that he wasn't just about him being a center or left wing, which I've already proven from multiple reputable sites that point to him being a center. My argument was that Hawrluk was a BETTER signing than Nordstrom because of the fact that Hawrluk has a better faceoff percentage than Nordstrom. This means that Hawrluk has that flexibility to be a centre if need be. We've also seen the body of work that Nordstrom has done as a center, and I do believe he is inferior in that regard.

 

It's a fair comparison BECAUSE they are both listed as centers, making similar salaries. Nothing more, nothing less. People really need to read what is written rather than jumping too quickly on voting their friends. It's pretty sad actually. Look at the same people who replied to me voting for people who posted against me, even though they didn't actually look at what was written.

Jayce has 68 NHL games played compared to Nordstrom's 400. Nordstrom also has playoff experience with some good teams.

 

Jayce may end up being better, and I hope he is. However, I wouldn't say that because Nordstrom is primarily a winger, and therefore not as good at faceoffs, that it makes him the inferior player. Using that logic, every natural C would be better than every winger just because of faceoff percentage.

 

You shouldn't need to point to sites to show what a player is listed as. If you watched him on a regular basis, you'd know he's a LW. Not sure what the rest of that last section is about, or what it has to do with Nordstrom.

[Patrick Kane]

Nordstrom has been centered by Kruger in Chicago, Staal/McClement in Carolina, and Kuraly in Boston. 

 

But yeah he's a Center. 

 

So is Dominik Kahun 

https://www.nhl.com/player/dominik-kahun-8480946

 

Is Brent Burns a RW? He was drafted as one in his rookie season!

[AV.]

The most bizarre thing is how the original comparison was between Nordstrom at 700K and Roussel at 3M.

 

Not sure why Hawrlyuk's name even got brought up here lol.

[Dazzle]

53 minutes ago, Patrick Kane said:

Nordstrom has been centered by Kruger in Chicago, Staal/McClement in Carolina, and Kuraly in Boston. 

 

But yeah he's a Center. 

 

So is Dominik Kahun 

https://www.nhl.com/player/dominik-kahun-8480946

 

Is Brent Burns a RW? He was drafted as one in his rookie season!

Dustin Byfuglien was also famously a forward and became better known as a defenceman too.

 

The comparison made was Nordstrom vs Howryluk. They are both depth signings, making near-identical salaries, who did at some point play center. One is not as good at faceoffs than the other, evidently. Both have taken a big enough sample to determine who is better.

 

Hence, Howryluk > Nordstrom as an option for the Canucks.

 

Apparently this was too hard for you to understand.

 

What's hilarious was trying to refute my argument using Boeser who was NEVER drafted as a center. Never played center, but merely took faceoffs with a much lower frequency and success. And those people thought it was a great argument

 

There's something else that's spreading besides corona - stupidity. You'd think the emotes they're passing around to each other that there was some kind of STD. It wouldn't surprise me the way they're following each other around.

Edited October 21, 2020 by Dazzle