Calgary Flames: Troy Brouwer’s Buyout Necessary For Wrong Reasons

I’m pretty sure that the overwhelming majority of Calgary Flames fans were giddy at the announcement of Troy Brouwer’s buyout. But the fact that Brad Treliving felt compelled to let him go now may be the symptom of a larger, more serious, problem.

You could hear it from the Rockies.

On Friday, the Calgary Flames announced the execution of the buyout of Troy Brouwer’s contract. And, when the news broke, the collective sigh of relief coming from Calgarians and fans from all over was enormous.

Brouwer’s buyout was inevitable. His 19 goals and 47 points in two seasons with the team were underwhelming given his $4.5M cap hit. Add to that his dramatic drop in possession (48% CF in two years with the Flames vs. 57.8% during the previous four years in Chicago), and keeping him around became very difficult to justify.

Then there’s the cap situation. With Brouwer gone, the Calgary Flames now have a little over $7M in cap space going into this season. That should allow GM Brad Treliving to sign newly-acquired Noah Hanifin and minor-leaguer Hunter Shinkaruk with more than enough room leftover for a Professional Tryout at training camp (I, for one, cannot wait to see who this year’s Tanner Glass will be).

All things considered, buying Brouwer out is a no-brainer, right?  Yes, but it exposes a larger problem than an underperforming hockey player.

According to the NHL Collective Bargaining Agreement, players aged 26 years or older at the time of a buyout are eligible to receive 2/3 of their remaining salary portioned over twice as many years as are remaining in the contract. So Brouwer, who had $9M remaining over 2 years, is due $6M over 4 years. Put another way, the Flames will be paying him $1.5M/year until the 2021/22 season.

Contrast that to a scenario where they buy Brouwer out next summer. Two-thirds of his remaining $4.5M would be spread over only 2 years. The net of it is that Brouwer would be off the books a full season earlier.  So keeping him an additional year is the more prudent financial decision.

Now, I know what you’re thinking.  A $1.5M cap hit is pretty insignificant, and a small price for the Calgary Flames to pay to rid themselves of Troy Brouwer.  And you’d be right.

My concern isn’t with the cost of Brouwer’s departure. It is with the reasons underlying it.  Brad Treliving didn’t WANT to get rid of Brouwer. He HAD to.

Treliving even alludes to it in his press conference, saying:

"With some of the changes we made, as our roster sits right now, both from a personnel perspective going forward and from a cap perspective, we just felt this was a move that made sense to us."

With the broad and sweeping changes that he has made, Brad Treliving has surrendered cost certainty. When he traded Micheal Ferland and Dougie Hamilton, he lost the security of their contracts.  Both were signed at reasonable salaries for at least a season.

Conversely, Hanifin and Elias Lindholm both came as pending RFAs that required negotiation and will likely collectively cost more than the players that went the other way. Similarly, James Neal’s contract is inflated in both cost and term. This was unavoidable as he was acquired around the July 1st free agency period, which features a sort of overvaluation of high-end assets.

This is not necessarily an indictment of the acquisitions themselves. Indeed, I think Neal’s presence is essential on a Calgary Flames team that had scoring problems last year. And Hanifin is not Hamilton. But there are reasons for optimism.

The acquisitions themselves may very well have made the team better. Time will tell.  But they have definitely made the team more expensive. Thus Treliving painted himself into a corner where he was forced to buy out Brouwer just to free up enough cap room to get everyone under contract.

That’s alarming.

Forget about lacking the flexibility to make a more responsible buyout decision with Brouwer.  Once Hanifin and Shinkaruk are signed, there could be anywhere from $3M to $1M in cap space left. That’s fine this year.  But almost every Flames player is under contract through next year as well.

So what happens next year when Matthew Tkachuk asks for a raise?  How about Mike Smith, whose deal expires at the end of this season?  Wouldn’t it be nice if the Calgary Flames had enough cap room to pay a goalie in the foreseeable future?

All of a sudden, that $1.5M the team owes Brouwer for each of the next four years seems important.

Treliving has invested a lot of money and a lot of contract years in this group of players at the expense of flexibility and future considerations. If this gamble fails, it will be very difficult for the next GM to undo.

Brad, if you’re reading this, please find the room to pay Tkachuk. The fans like him.