So Where do we go from here? Analysis & Predictions

[phoenix66]

Just now, Flyerfan52 said:

Brodie, Holtby, Spurgeon & Hoffman are mentioned for that reason in the off-season primer on SN.

dang , here I thought I figured that all on my own ..lol

[phoenix66]

anybody ever hear of this guy?.. I'm guessing he makes up more stuff than Eklund

this is laughable ..

 

 

[The_People1]

50 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

May or may not mean anything , but TJ Brodie's MNTC kicks in next season .. so if there was any thought towards moving him , this is when it will happen

 

If we can get a D from another trade, like Bennett for Hanifin, then we should trade Brodie.  But not until we have his replacement on our roster.  He is not untouchable but he is the anchor on the second pair.  I wouldn't just trade him for the sake of trading him. 

[cross16]

34 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

anybody ever hear of this guy?.. I'm guessing he makes up more stuff than Eklund

this is laughable ..

 

 

 

Looked through his account, it's horrible. I wouldn't put any faith in that. 

[phoenix66]

1 minute ago, cross16 said:

 

Looked through his account, it's horrible. I wouldn't put any faith in that. 

oh absolutely but it makes for good conversation .. like i put in the other thread , i want Ottawa to win tomorrow if for no other reason than to get this whole goalie thing done .

[travel_dude]

5 hours ago, Flyerfan52 said:

1st you say that LV will claim MAF if they can but then say after the draft for Carolina who could use him or lose him - don't matter as it rids them of the 3 under contract scenario as the Pens need an exposable 1 leaving them with only who they can use as b/u.

Washington doesn't work as they lose Grubauer & Carolina has no need to give much for MAF as they know the hit hurts the Caps & what any team offers is unlikely to replace the skater lost if LV opts to go that way. Better for Washington just to lose Grubauer, keep their skaters & promote 1 of  Carlson/Vanacek or sign a cheap b/u.

 

Some mixed messages in that train of thought.

 

The first train was that if MAF unprotected (through trade to WASH) LV would claim him.  That gets the interest away from their other players.  WASH has already traded Grubauer to us, so they have that trade assets (picks or whatever).  The part I forgot about was what they would give up to get MAF in the first place.

 

The 2nd train was if traded to WASH and MAF goes unclaimed, they could trade him to CAR.  They return wouldn't be that great, but at least CAR can get him without having to worry about the ex draft.

 

In the end, it makes more sense for WASH to just keep who they have.  But, I will keep that quiet.  Don't want WASH to hear.

[Flyerfan52]

12 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

In the end, it makes more sense for WASH to just keep who they have.  But, I will keep that quiet.  Don't want WASH to hear.

My lips are sealed until we announce Grubauer as a Flame.

[MAC331]

15 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Looked through his account, it's horrible. I wouldn't put any faith in that. 

It is likely People's twitter account. LOL

[MAC331]

It would appear the Flames have a choice to make surrounding Backlund and Bennett. Do they need to make that decision now or by the TDL ? It appears from most recent posts that very few want to pay Backlund 6M to be our 2nd line C and reserve this money for Bennett at some point. Backlund is also our best trade chip outside of Giordano so what should the Flames do ?

I think we should treat Backlund as a #2 C and extend him for 5 years at 5.5M. If this team want to be challengers every year from here we like our competition need a player like Backlund. Now for Tkachuk, I would like to see him play RW with Gaudreau and Monahan because I feel he is versatile enough to do so. If we do this we likely have Ferland playing LW with Backlund and Frolik or if they sign back Versteeg he could play with Backlund and Frolik. Here goes.

Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk

Versteeg, Backlund, Frolik

Ferland, Bennett, Lazar

Bouma, Jankowski, Brouwer

[AlbertaBoy12]

47 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I think we should treat Backlund as a #2 C and extend him for 5 years at 5.5M. 

Gaudreau, Monahan, Ferland

Tkachuk-Bennett-Lazar

Versteeg-Jankowski-Frolik

Bouma- Stajan-Brouwer

 

This whole sign him for 5 years at 5.5 is a really nice thought, but I really doubt he signs for that I dont see him doing the flames that favour for whatever reason. I see it playing it out one of two ways the flames trade him this summer or he signs a long term extension north of 6 million this summer with us trading him in a year or two. If im BT I dont wait till after this season to try and get him signed to a deal, just in case he walks in free agency for nothing. Thats not guaranteed to happen obviously, but I would assume BT will know soon enough whether backlund wants to resign or not, and at what amount. 

 

I think jankowski is wasted on the 4th line, I dont think you see your top center prospect playing there. If hes ready for the show you give him top 9 minutes if not you send him down to the AAA, kind of a waste to play him 10-12 minutes a night with brouwer/bouma. Id much rather see tkachuk play with bennett, giving him ferland/lazar doesnt solve any problems from this paste season as they are not high skilled guys to play with him. Ferland can continue to compliment the 1st line, he was more then fine there for the quarter of the season he was there. I wouldnt be too worried about matchups or D zone starts, if we can trade backlund for faulk improving our top 4 immensely, the only problem being our 4th line is a sink hole.

[phoenix66]

1 hour ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

This whole sign him for 5 years at 5.5 is a really nice thought, but I really doubt he signs for that I dont see him doing the flames that favour for whatever reason. I see it playing it out one of two ways the flames trade him this summer or he signs a long term extension north of 6 million this summer with us trading him in a year or two. If im BT I dont wait till after this season to try and get him signed to a deal, just in case he walks in free agency for nothing. Thats not guaranteed to happen obviously, but I would assume BT will know soon enough whether backlund wants to resign or not, and at what amount. 

 

I think jankowski is wasted on the 4th line, I dont think you see your top center prospect playing there. If hes ready for the show you give him top 9 minutes if not you send him down to the AAA, kind of a waste to play him 10-12 minutes a night with brouwer/bouma. Id much rather see tkachuk play with bennett, giving him ferland/lazar doesnt solve any problems from this paste season as they are not high skilled guys to play with him. Ferland can continue to compliment the 1st line, he was more then fine there for the quarter of the season he was there. I wouldnt be too worried about matchups or D zone starts, if we can trade backlund for faulk improving our top 4 immensely, the only problem being our 4th line is a sink hole.

I think 5.5 gets it done .. on a 5 year at least..open market he is definitely a 6 player , but the comparables are there for a 5.5 with some term . I'm certain it would come with a limited NTC.. BT seems ok with those, but not a NMC

 

in terms of the 4th line, if BT does whats needed and moves the right bodies, then the 4th line isn't a graveyard , in this day and age you need 4 lines rolling .. with the right wingers he could head up a very effective line.. you basically end up with SM, Backlund, Bennett and Jankowski down the middle 

Personally I dont break up the Backlund - Frolik  - Tkachuk line.. its our only trio that played well consistently , why ruin a good thing 

[AlbertaBoy12]

41 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

I think 5.5 gets it done .. on a 5 year at least..open market he is definitely a 6 player , but the comparables are there for a 5.5 with some term . I'm certain it would come with a limited NTC.. BT seems ok with those, but not a NMC

Im not quite sure which comparables you are looking at, but theres plenty of centeres that backlund is better then making 6, I dont see him signing for 5.5 even long term unless he really wants to stay in calgary. I dont want janko playing on the 4th line so we can keep backlund though, Im not a huge fan of that.

 

I love the 3m just the same as anyone else, but backlund/frolik would be fine without tkachuk, bennett needs a high end winger more then backlund/frolik do. Id much rather see the 3m broken up to give bennett some help then continue to see bennett play with the wrong players.

[MAC331]

22 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

This whole sign him for 5 years at 5.5 is a really nice thought, but I really doubt he signs for that I dont see him doing the flames that favour for whatever reason. I see it playing it out one of two ways the flames trade him this summer or he signs a long term extension north of 6 million this summer with us trading him in a year or two. If im BT I dont wait till after this season to try and get him signed to a deal, just in case he walks in free agency for nothing. Thats not guaranteed to happen obviously, but I would assume BT will know soon enough whether backlund wants to resign or not, and at what amount. 

 

I think jankowski is wasted on the 4th line, I dont think you see your top center prospect playing there. If hes ready for the show you give him top 9 minutes if not you send him down to the AAA, kind of a waste to play him 10-12 minutes a night with brouwer/bouma. Id much rather see tkachuk play with bennett, giving him ferland/lazar doesnt solve any problems from this paste season as they are not high skilled guys to play with him. Ferland can continue to compliment the 1st line, he was more then fine there for the quarter of the season he was there. I wouldnt be too worried about matchups or D zone starts, if we can trade backlund for faulk improving our top 4 immensely, the only problem being our 4th line is a sink hole.

Yeah well everyone thought Gaudreau would get 7M plus so we will have see what happens. I agree getting it settled this offseason.

I actually find nothing wrong with Jankowski getting some 4th line grunt work as his initiation to the NHL, let him work his way in and up the ladder. Tkachuk with Bennett would never be a bad idea but I am more curious to see what he can do with the other two.

[jjgallow]

55 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Yeah well everyone thought Gaudreau would get 7M plus so we will have see what happens. I agree getting it settled this offseason.

I actually find nothing wrong with Jankowski getting some 4th line grunt work as his initiation to the NHL, let work his way in and up the ladder. Tkachuk with Bennett would never be a bad idea but I am more curious to see what he can do with the other two.

 

If by "everyone" you mean about three posters on here with a history of over-rating Flames players, than yes.

 

Gaudreau provides significant offense when in the right environment (which isn't playoffs).   And, he does it in an exciting way.

 

That's it.    His market value will depend on the economics of the team he plays for.  If he wants 7 million, he will need to play for a big market team.

 

Jankowski, if he does well in training camp, might be perfect for that 4th line role.   I honestly don't see him advancing much from there but he has definitely reached the higher range of my expectations.   So who knows.

 

Tkachuk and Bennett, hopefully, are on the top two lines next year (or by the end of next year).

[phoenix66]

12 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

Im not quite sure which comparables you are looking at, but theres plenty of centeres that backlund is better then making 6, I dont see him signing for 5.5 even long term unless he really wants to stay in calgary.

of many comparables Ive read , the name that keeps coming up as most similar is Frans Nielsen.. similar player, points and finished 17th in Selke voting last year .. he makes 5.25.. 2 years into a 6 year deal .. he is younger, so to think he can be had for 5.5-5.7 is not unrealistic

 

Janko may eventually Backlund expendable , but we cant just pencil him in, he's played 1 NHL game and could easily be 2-3 years away from fully replacing Backlund, we're not in a position to create a hole for his skillset 

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, phoenix66 said:

of many comparables Ive read , the name that keeps coming up as most similar is Frans Nielsen.. similar player, points and finished 17th in Selke voting last year .. he makes 5.25.. 2 years into a 6 year deal .. he is younger, so to think he can be had for 5.5-5.7 is not unrealistic

 

Janko may eventually Backlund expendable , but we cant just pencil him in, he's played 1 NHL game and could easily be 2-3 years away from fully replacing Backlund, we're not in a position to create a hole for his skillset 

 

 

I agree, but I think a lot of the trade Backs posters are thinking that Bennett replaces Backlund, and Jankowski replaces what Bennett is. 

 

Bennett improved, but has yet to show he is capable yet. For me, and i know I am not supported in this idea, i think he could still be a great winger. I get the organization doesn't want to go that way...

[MAC331]

5 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

 

I agree, but I think a lot of the trade Backs posters are thinking that Bennett replaces Backlund, and Jankowski replaces what Bennett is. 

 

Bennett improved, but has yet to show he is capable yet. For me, and i know I am not supported in this idea, i think he could still be a great winger. I get the organization doesn't want to go that way...

I think this is where you double down on Bennett. You sign Backlund and have a solid #2 C a veteran Bennett can learn from for a few years yet. You bring in Jankowski and you have another young C that also wants that 3rd line or even 2nd line job. Healthy competition IMO.

I don't know if you aren't supported on the idea of Bennett as a LW or if the team hasn't reached the point where they could afford to move him off of C. Perhaps with solidifying Backlund with a new contract allows them to move Bennett to LW and have Tkachuk move to RW on the top line. I don't think they do this right out of the chute but they could.

Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk

Bennett, Backlund, Frolik

Ferland, Jankowski, Brouwer

Bouma, Lazar, Hathaway (for now)

[AlbertaBoy12]

8 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

of many comparables Ive read , the name that keeps coming up as most similar is Frans Nielsen.. similar player, points and finished 17th in Selke voting last year .. he makes 5.25.. 2 years into a 6 year deal .. he is younger, so to think he can be had for 5.5-5.7 is not unrealistic

 

Janko may eventually Backlund expendable , but we cant just pencil him in, he's played 1 NHL game and could easily be 2-3 years away from fully replacing Backlund, we're not in a position to create a hole for his skillset 

Yea ive mentioned frans nielsen plenty to point out that backlund is a better player in the eyes of the league I would assume. Im honestly really suriprised that backlund didnt get nominated for the selke this year, I think he was more deserving then zach hyman.  

 

We dont need to worry about backlund being expendable, everyone is getting far to wrapped up in what the talking heads go on about with zone starts etc, would it be an adjustment without backlund sure, but if we made a smart trade the team should be better in the short term and long term. 

2 hours ago, MAC331 said:

I think this is where you double down on Bennett. You sign Backlund and have a solid #2 C a veteran Bennett can learn from for a few years yet. You bring in Jankowski and you have another young C that also wants that 3rd line or even 2nd line job. Healthy competition IMO.

I don't know if you aren't supported on the idea of Bennett as a LW or if the team hasn't reached the point where they could afford to move him off of C. Perhaps with solidifying Backlund with a new contract allows them to move Bennett to LW and have Tkachuk move to RW on the top line. I don't think they do this right out of the chute but they could.

Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk

Bennett, Backlund, Frolik

Ferland, Jankowski, Brouwer

Bouma, Lazar, Hathaway (for now)

I dont want to shut down your idea here, but the flames have made it very clear they see bennett as a center, and even though most people her arnet happy with his season(im sure bennett isent either), theres lots to be happy with for his first year at center. If the team was going to do this idea you are suggesting here, that bottom 6 is going to get slaughtered night in and night out, the only player proven in that group is ferland for moving the puck the right way. In my opinion the only way we see jankowski up here next year is if backlund gets traded, I dont see them moving bennett to the wing to make room for janko.

[MAC331]

43 minutes ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

Yea ive mentioned frans nielsen plenty to point out that backlund is a better player in the eyes of the league I would assume. Im honestly really suriprised that backlund didnt get nominated for the selke this year, I think he was more deserving then zach hyman.  

 

We dont need to worry about backlund being expendable, everyone is getting far to wrapped up in what the talking heads go on about with zone starts etc, would it be an adjustment without backlund sure, but if we made a smart trade the team should be better in the short term and long term. 

I dont want to shut down your idea here, but the flames have made it very clear they see bennett as a center, and even though most people her arnet happy with his season(im sure bennett isent either), theres lots to be happy with for his first year at center. If the team was going to do this idea you are suggesting here, that bottom 6 is going to get slaughtered night in and night out, the only player proven in that group is ferland for moving the puck the right way. In my opinion the only way we see jankowski up here next year is if backlund gets traded, I dont see them moving bennett to the wing to make room for janko.

I wouldn't worry about shutting down any idea on here. I was presenting a scenario to support rob rob's thinking of having Bennett shift to LW if Backlund is kept as our #2 C. As for Jankowski you know nothing about the Flames plans for him and neither do I. You think your way and I will think mine. Your thinking is your viewpoint only.

[AlbertaBoy12]

1 minute ago, MAC331 said:

I wouldn't worry about shutting down any idea on here. I was presenting a scenario to support rob rob's thinking of having Bennett shift to LW if Backlund is kept as our #2 C. As for Jankowski you know nothing about the Flames plans for him and neither do I. You think your way and I will think mine. Your thinking is your viewpoint only.

Well thats fine, im simply pointing out that the orginization has stated they dont want bennett on the wing, they also indirectly said thats part of the reason BH got fired. Youre right neither of us know the plans for janko, but if you can tell me why it makes sense to put your top center prospect on the 4th line with bouma and hathway probably playing 10 mins a night im all ears.

[travel_dude]

9 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

 

I agree, but I think a lot of the trade Backs posters are thinking that Bennett replaces Backlund, and Jankowski replaces what Bennett is. 

 

Bennett improved, but has yet to show he is capable yet. For me, and i know I am not supported in this idea, i think he could still be a great winger. I get the organization doesn't want to go that way...

 

This isn't a trade Backlund mantra being used here.  It's a "can't afford $6m long term for an eventual 3rd line center" thinking.  You look at Backlund's role on the team in three years.  If he isn't going to be the #1C, then you don't pay $6m for him.  If there a reasonable chance that Bennett can overtake him, then you don't commit $6m to him.

Simple as that.

 

That also leads to what can you get for him now, while his value is highest.  Can we get a top pairing D-man or a top RW?  

 

Losing a very good 2 way center is tough unless you get back better defense or more offense.  Doubt it happens. but it's interesting to look at alternatives.

[MAC331]

2 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

Well thats fine, im simply pointing out that the orginization has stated they dont want bennett on the wing, they also indirectly said thats part of the reason BH got fired. Youre right neither of us know the plans for janko, but if you can tell me why it makes sense to put your top center prospect on the 4th line with bouma and hathway probably playing 10 mins a night im all ears.

I did tell you.

[DirtyDeeds]

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

This isn't a trade Backlund mantra being used here.  It's a "can't afford $6m long term for an eventual 3rd line center" thinking.  You look at Backlund's role on the team in three years.  If he isn't going to be the #1C, then you don't pay $6m for him.  If there a reasonable chance that Bennett can overtake him, then you don't commit $6m to him.

Simple as that.

 

That also leads to what can you get for him now, while his value is highest.  Can we get a top pairing D-man or a top RW?  

 

Losing a very good 2 way center is tough unless you get back better defense or more offense.  Doubt it happens. but it's interesting to look at alternatives.

In my mind Backs has played himself into the untradeable core group. No one has played wel enough to take his #2 spot from him so until they do, he is that man now.. 1-2-3 years down the road, until someone takes that spot from him, it belongs to him. He has played well past the 3rd line center level.

 

You TD have to get over that 3rd line center thinking. If and then when someone steps up to the plate and proves he can take that spot, all your thinking will do is turn us into the next Colorado and their revolving door of centers. You don't replace your centers on spec that 3 years down the road they won't be as good. Backs is the perfect age for this team. Still young enough to improve and not so old to worry about declining talent yet.

 

As for the reasonable chance Bennett can overtake him... sure we all want to believe that will happen. Trouble is you need the #2 center until Bennett steps up to the plate. Backs shouldn't have to forgo his earned money on spec Bennett will be the #2, 3 years later..  

 

Simple as that.

[robrob74]

5 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

Yea ive mentioned frans nielsen plenty to point out that backlund is a better player in the eyes of the league I would assume. Im honestly really suriprised that backlund didnt get nominated for the selke this year, I think he was more deserving then zach hyman.  

 

We dont need to worry about backlund being expendable, everyone is getting far to wrapped up in what the talking heads go on about with zone starts etc, would it be an adjustment without backlund sure, but if we made a smart trade the team should be better in the short term and long term. 

I dont want to shut down your idea here, but the flames have made it very clear they see bennett as a center, and even though most people her arnet happy with his season(im sure bennett isent either), theres lots to be happy with for his first year at center. If the team was going to do this idea you are suggesting here, that bottom 6 is going to get slaughtered night in and night out, the only player proven in that group is ferland for moving the puck the right way. In my opinion the only way we see jankowski up here next year is if backlund gets traded, I dont see them moving bennett to the wing to make room for janko.

 

This definitely isn't next season talk, this is future down the road. In a few years they could have more C options and that's a good thing. 

 

We could draft a C this year that ends up playing wing, or shifting Bennett. But developing him as a C is great because you keep that option. 

[travel_dude]

4 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

You TD have to get over that 3rd line center thinking. If and then when someone steps up to the plate and proves he can take that spot, all your thinking will do is turn us into the next Colorado and their revolving door of centers. You don't replace your centers on spec that 3 years down the road they won't be as good. Backs is the perfect age for this team. Still young enough to improve and not so old to worry about declining talent yet.

 

 

Sure he's a #1C right now or at least #2 with a better defensive game than Monahan.  I'm less worried about his play declining over the next three years than I am of signing him to a long term $6m deal.  If we can afford it, then fine.  We don't look to spend more on our defense.  

 

If and maybe when Bennett overtakes Backlund, then we either have 3 really good centers.  Hard to deal him at that point.