So Where do we go from here? Analysis & Predictions

[phoenix66]

10 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

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.

I say you cross that Bridge when you come to it.

It wasn't all that long ago we would have given up our left you-know-what   for a Center . Iggy went years , outside of Conroy , never having a #1 center cuz we couldn't find one. They dont grow on trees and teams don't like to give them up .

The best we had, was Matt Stajan, that was Sutters intent when he traded for him, and when he signed him .

 

Since then , we have drafted and groomed a #1 and a line of successors. If anything the mistake was giving him his current contract , but again, when we did it , Monahan was a rookie and he was still the best we had. Until Janko started showing promise, he was still the 4th best center in our organization 

 

So yes , lets say Backlund gets his 6 mill.. 5 years.. I say you only regret maybe the last year , maybe 2.. but at the end of the day , there will alway be a team willing to take that player off your hands. If not , and the day comes we have 4 centers all out playing him and we have a 6M healthy scratch?  thats a good problem to have .

 

I have way more faith in BT to get the proper transition done than Ive had since Fletcher 

[MAC331]

10 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

I say you cross that Bridge when you come to it.

It wasn't all that long ago we would have given up our left you-know-what   for a Center . Iggy went years , outside of Conroy , never having a #1 center cuz we couldn't find one. They dont grow on trees and teams don't like to give them up .

The best we had, was Matt Stajan, that was Sutters intent when he traded for him, and when he signed him .

 

Since then , we have drafted and groomed a #1 and a line of successors. If anything the mistake was giving him his current contract , but again, when we did it , Monahan was a rookie and he was still the best we had. Until Janko started showing promise, he was still the 4th best center in our organization 

 

So yes , lets say Backlund gets his 6 mill.. 5 years.. I say you only regret maybe the last year , maybe 2.. but at the end of the day , there will alway be a team willing to take that player off your hands. If not , and the day comes we have 4 centers all out playing him and we have a 6M healthy scratch?  thats a good problem to have .

 

I have way more faith in BT to get the proper transition done than Ive had since Fletcher 

You also cannot ignore the C position has been built up and we would be dealing from a position of strength. I agree we would be premature IMO trading Backlund this offseason because it weakens the team for a period of time. I think you take the half season and see where you are as a team at the TDL with progress from Bennett and Jankowski.

[phoenix66]

1 minute ago, MAC331 said:

You also cannot ignore the C position has been built up and we would be dealing from a position of strength. I agree we would be premature IMO trading Backlund this offseason because it weakens the team for a period of time. I think you take the half season and see where you are as a team at the TDL with progress from Bennett and Jankowski.

oh ya, agreed..  there is literally nobody on this team I would consider untouchable.. the only caveat now is you dont weaken the team or the position to do it.. when the day comes that Bennett or Janko have shown they have made Backlund expendable, then by all means , have at it. Just that hoping you can replace him leaves too much room to backfire

 

If its true that 6M is the acceptable price for a player of Backlunds caliber, then sign him.. you can trade him when hes expendable

[Flyerfan52]

It looks like we have a lot of capspace now @ 21.8 but that's for 9 forwards, 4 D & 0 goalies. If we assume "show me" deals for Bennett & Ferland for 1 year @ a total of 5 we're down to 16.8. Say we spend a combined 8 on 2 goalies (again short contracts in case they don't fit) that leaves 8.8 for 2 more forwards & 3 D. Fill 4 spots with ELCs & you have enough @ 4.8 for 1 top 4 D or top 9 forward (either on a re-sign of Stone, Lazar. Versteeg or in the FA market). That's with Backlund @ 3.575.

Next year we show 33 in space but have only 8 skaters signed. If any of the "show me" contracts (or those in the last year of ELC) work out those players go for big raises taking a large chunk. If we've kept Backlund @ 6-6.5 & our current 6+ million men we have 9 skaters with 27 to spend on 11 spots. That farm team better come through big time.

The problem with waiting until the TD with Backlund is if he's a big part of being in contention he's too valuable to trade but the price tag rises since he has the UFA hammer. If freshly re-signed this off season it leads to that cap crunch where 1 of the money men has to go. Say Gaudreau gets off to another slow start not only do his #s drop but so does his trade value.

It's nice to think Backs will take a loyalty discount & re-up @ $5 million but this is a 28 year old that worked his whole career getting better & deserves a payday. We seem to have set the bar with Gaudreau & Monahan on what was only their 2nd contract. Earned, not given should apply to contracts as well as ice time if you want team morale. BT's opening offer will tell him & his agent all they need to know.

[travel_dude]

48 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

oh ya, agreed..  there is literally nobody on this team I would consider untouchable.. the only caveat now is you dont weaken the team or the position to do it.. when the day comes that Bennett or Janko have shown they have made Backlund expendable, then by all means , have at it. Just that hoping you can replace him leaves too much room to backfire

 

If its true that 6M is the acceptable price for a player of Backlunds caliber, then sign him.. you can trade him when hes expendable

 

A few years ago, Nuge appeared to be a top center in the league.  He was give a big $6m contract.  He's not untradeable right now, but his value is closer to a #3 center now, not somebody making $6m.  His FO% is bad.  

 

Trading Backlund from when his value is highest would only be done not to weaken the team.  Ryan Johannson brought back Seth Jones.  And that was with him having issues with the coach/team.   That's the kind of trade that makes sense.  It makes you stronger on the backend.  

 

And to echo FF52's talk about the cap, it makes it harder to keep all your players if you pay Backlund $6m.  Backlund s not the problem.  It's having too many players making that kind of money.  Gio's deal will kill us if he starts to drop off soon.  I'm ok with Monahan and Gaudreau's contracts right now, since they are still leading the team in scoring.  Brouwer's deal is killing us because of value for points.  We need a top 4D, a top 6 RW, and two goalies.  Not to mention two 3rd pair D-men.

 

[robrob74]

5 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.

 

If we could get a Top Pair Dman, that could be a great trade, moving Giordano down to 2nd pair in a few years? I am assuming that you'd mean that it would be a young D who isn't quite there yet, that will be in a few years? Or, still move Giordano down a notch, and we just don't name our D pairs, pair 1 or 2. 

 

We'd still be setting our C backwards a few years. Maybe that's a deal that gets done when Bennett catches up? 

 

Was there talk that Anaheim might be interested in Bennett?

[robrob74]

10 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 know Backlund doesn't have to and probably will not give the Flames a discount. But it could be argued that he is the #2 by situation right now. He is very valuable to help out with defending the hardest competition. But if we want to argue that Bennett may pass him on the depth chart in a few years, how can that happen? It sounds reasonable, but not at the same time. It's like Bouma a few years ago, yet not a Boums situation. He was a scorer by default because we had no one else. 

 

I love backlund. What would Sharp in his prime be worth today? That's where I see Backlund. Is he as good and deserve Kesler money right now?

[MAC331]

29 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

 

I know Backlund doesn't have to and probably will not give the Flames a discount. But it could be argued that he is the #2 by situation right now. He is very valuable to help out with defending the hardest competition. But if we want to argue that Bennett may pass him on the depth chart in a few years, how can that happen? It sounds reasonable, but not at the same time. It's like Bouma a few years ago, yet not a Boums situation. He was a scorer by default because we had no one else. 

 

I love backlund. What would Sharp in his prime be worth today? That's where I see Backlund. Is he as good and deserve Kesler money right now?

Any market is need driven, at times it works in the player's favor and other time not. Calgary is the only team Backlund has known and if he wants to stay they should be able to work something out that works for both sides.

[robrob74]

8 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Any market is need driven, at times it works in the player's favor and other time not. Calgary is the only team Backlund has known and if he wants to stay they should be able to work something out that works for both sides.

 

I think this is the case. Plus, it has been years ago, but it was said that his partner is from Calgary, so that could be incentive to stay as well. Family is a good reason to stay. The "wife" seems to have a lot of say in some situation like these? 

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

If we could get a Top Pair Dman, that could be a great trade, moving Giordano down to 2nd pair in a few years? I am assuming that you'd mean that it would be a young D who isn't quite there yet, that will be in a few years? Or, still move Giordano down a notch, and we just don't name our D pairs, pair 1 or 2. 

 

We'd still be setting our C backwards a few years. Maybe that's a deal that gets done when Bennett catches up? 

 

Was there talk that Anaheim might be interested in Bennett?

 

Yes, like a Vatanen for Backlund type trade.  Not him specifically, but that age group and skill level.  Or a Hanifin ++ for Backlund.  

 

I have to ask this because I don't know the answer.  Is Stajan capable of playing anywhere near as good as Backlund?  Swap in Stajan with Tkachuk and Frolik and what would you have?  Stajan played 4th line minutes and PK and still managed to score 23 points.  And his FO% was better.  

 

Almost had you going, right?

[MAC331]

41 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Yes, like a Vatanen for Backlund type trade.  Not him specifically, but that age group and skill level.  Or a Hanifin ++ for Backlund.  

 

I have to ask this because I don't know the answer.  Is Stajan capable of playing anywhere near as good as Backlund?  Swap in Stajan with Tkachuk and Frolik and what would you have?  Stajan played 4th line minutes and PK and still managed to score 23 points.  And his FO% was better.  

 

Almost had you going, right?

I know cross has mentioned Faulk from CAR but I would go with Pesce to play with Brodie. I do think Bennett will make big strides next season so I don't think trading Backlund would set us back that much for to long. Slide Jankowski onto a 3rd line and bring in Thompson UFA for the 4th line C.

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

Yes, like a Vatanen for Backlund type trade.  Not him specifically, but that age group and skill level.  Or a Hanifin ++ for Backlund.  

 

I have to ask this because I don't know the answer.  Is Stajan capable of playing anywhere near as good as Backlund?  Swap in Stajan with Tkachuk and Frolik and what would you have?  Stajan played 4th line minutes and PK and still managed to score 23 points.  And his FO% was better.  

 

Almost had you going, right?

 

I think mods need to have likes. I don't think any of us would give the impression of sucking up.

 

?

 

but it either way, tough call but it makes for good conversation.

 

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

I know cross has mentioned Faulk from CAR but I would go with Pesce to play with Brodie. I do think Bennett will make big strides next season so I don't think trading Backlund would set us back that much for to long. Slide Jankowski onto a 3rd line and bring in Thompson UFA for the 4th line C.

 

Could we sign or trade for a C that can make it work? Stajan is Stajan and I am not sure what his stamina will be like.

 

i am a bit scared of trading backs though. 

[MAC331]

On ‎2017‎-‎06‎-‎04 at 8:57 PM, robrob74 said:

 

Could we sign or trade for a C that can make it work? Stajan is Stajan and I am not sure what his stamina will be like.

 

i am a bit scared of trading backs though. 

Nobody is irreplaceable however if BT were to offer Backlund 5.5M and 5 years and he rejected it I would trade him now. If he accepts we have our strong C positioning down the middle for years. Stajan IMO has to go, we need the spot and he brings very little to the party anymore. Same goes for Bouma, maybe BT reads him the riot act that his play has to improve or he will be riding his contract out in Stockton or lower.

[robrob74]

2 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Nobody is irreplaceable however if BT were to offer Backlund 5.5M and 5 years and he rejected it I would trade him now. If he accepts we have our strong C positioning down the middle for years. Stajan IMO has to go, we need the spot and he brings very little to the party anymore. Same goes for Bouma, maybe BT reads him the riot act that his play has to improve or he will be riding his contract out in Stockton or lower.

 

I agree! I feel like backs should be a 5.25. I am Dreaming. Still sleepy.

 

 

i agree with Bouma and Stajan being gone. 

[travel_dude]

3 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Nobody is irreplaceable however if BT were to offer Backlund 5.5M and 5 years and he rejected it I would trade him now. If he accepts we have our strong C positioning down the middle for years. Stajan IMO has to go, we need the spot and he brings very little to the party anymore. Same goes for Bouma, maybe BT reads him the riot act that his play has to improve or he will be riding his contract out in Stockton or lower.

 

Stajan still provides offense, considering his 4th line minutes and PK.  Not at a high level for sure.  But, I agree he should be replaced.  Every thing he does is just ok.  An upgrade or young potential center on the 4th line is warranted.

 

I imagine that BT has some kind of idea from Backlund on his salary expectations, though he can't re-sign until July 1st.  I think it could get ugly, since his agent will high ball the ask.  I don't think that an ask of $6+m is out of the question.  If Monahan is worth $6.3, how is a less sheltered, defensive center that provides decent scoring worth that much less.  Not saying we should pay it, just saying that any hometown discount will come with a full NTC and signing bonus (to protect from strike/lockout).

[MAC331]

Just now, travel_dude said:

 

Stajan still provides offense, considering his 4th line minutes and PK.  Not at a high level for sure.  But, I agree he should be replaced.  Every thing he does is just ok.  An upgrade or young potential center on the 4th line is warranted.

 

I imagine that BT has some kind of idea from Backlund on his salary expectations, though he can't re-sign until July 1st.  I think it could get ugly, since his agent will high ball the ask.  I don't think that an ask of $6+m is out of the question.  If Monahan is worth $6.3, how is a less sheltered, defensive center that provides decent scoring worth that much less.  Not saying we should pay it, just saying that any hometown discount will come with a full NTC and signing bonus (to protect from strike/lockout).

Firstly I would say age plays a factor. Secondly keeping Backlund affordable should you want to trade him 2 years down the road. Agents can ask it is their job however GM's have to have the big picture in mind all the time. We could use Backlund for another season or 2 but then we have a pipeline of Cs that can and will overtake what he does for us.

[travel_dude]

25 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Firstly I would say age plays a factor. Secondly keeping Backlund affordable should you want to trade him 2 years down the road. Agents can ask it is their job however GM's have to have the big picture in mind all the time. We could use Backlund for another season or 2 but then we have a pipeline of Cs that can and will overtake what he does for us.

 

All I am saying is that the NTC has to be a consideration for a player taking a hometown discount.  They give up dollars for stability.

Mybe Backlund doesn't care about that.  Don't see why he should suffer for the team wanting to pay him less.

[cross16]

I'm not a subscriber so can't get the full article but for those doing off season planing, Rumors have the cap going up 2 million to 75 next year. This is WITHOUT the NHLPA using the escalator clause so there is a chance it could go higher depending on what the PA decides to do. The latest is that the PA was leaning towards not using the clause as they don't want more money in escrow and they figure adding another team in Vegas will be enough to drive up salaries. 

 

 

[Flyerfan52]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

Firstly I would say age plays a factor. Secondly keeping Backlund affordable should you want to trade him 2 years down the road. Agents can ask it is their job however GM's have to have the big picture in mind all the time. We could use Backlund for another season or 2 but then we have a pipeline of Cs that can and will overtake what he does for us.

Backlund is 28 & hitting his prime earnings age. There is no reason for him to sign an easily tradable contract without testing the market. Right now Backlund's agent can justify that he brings more to the team with his defensive role while the points are slightly less than Monahan's. Monahan is 6 years younger & might become better but right now Backs brings more value to the table.

It's nice to look @ what is good for the Flames but players have a limited time to earn the $s before the league tosses them to the wayside.

[MAC331]

Just now, Flyerfan52 said:

Backlund is 28 & hitting his prime earnings age. There is no reason for him to sign an easily tradable contract without testing the market. Right now Backlund's agent can justify that he brings more to the team with his defensive role while the points are slightly less than Monahan's. Monahan is 6 years younger & might become better but right now Backs brings more value to the table.

It's nice to look @ what is good for the Flames but players have a limited time to earn the $s before the league tosses them to the wayside.

Yeah I feel so sorry for them making the little money they do. LOL

I don't really care what they do whether they leave him and trade him at the TDL, trade him now but I wouldn't pay him top dollar to stay when I know I can cover his absence quite quickly with the talent coming on.

[travel_dude]

3 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Yeah I feel so sorry for them making the little money they do. LOL

I don't really care what they do whether they leave him and trade him at the TDL, trade him now but I wouldn't pay him top dollar to stay when I know I can cover his absence quite quickly with the talent coming on.

 

I was one of the ones saying we should trade him, but that is because of his trade value.  I had hoped that Bennett would have passed him this year, at least in scoring.  But he didn't.  Stajan is never going to be half the player.  We have hopefulls in Janko etc., but they are still not proven.  It may take Janko 5 years to become as good as Backlund, assuming he can get to that level.

 

Maybe the timing is perfect and we can trade him this year for a young disaffected center and D prospect.  Maybe Janko shows enough in his first season with the Flames.  I just don't want to go from center depth to center drought.

[JTech780]

 

[MAC331]

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I was one of the ones saying we should trade him, but that is because of his trade value.  I had hoped that Bennett would have passed him this year, at least in scoring.  But he didn't.  Stajan is never going to be half the player.  We have hopefulls in Janko etc., but they are still not proven.  It may take Janko 5 years to become as good as Backlund, assuming he can get to that level.

 

Maybe the timing is perfect and we can trade him this year for a young disaffected center and D prospect.  Maybe Janko shows enough in his first season with the Flames.  I just don't want to go from center depth to center drought.

I don't see the need to worry Monahan, Bennett, Jankowski, Lazar (if need be) Dube to name a few. Sure you give up experience but I don't see a ton of falloff that could not be overcome. Backlind would need to go to a team with no real answer for a #2 or #3 C in sight within their system to be paid over 6M, we don't need to do it.

[robrob74]

3 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Yeah I feel so sorry for them making the little money they do. LOL

I don't really care what they do whether they leave him and trade him at the TDL, trade him now but I wouldn't pay him top dollar to stay when I know I can cover his absence quite quickly with the talent coming on.

 

3 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I was one of the ones saying we should trade him, but that is because of his trade value.  I had hoped that Bennett would have passed him this year, at least in scoring.  But he didn't.  Stajan is never going to be half the player.  We have hopefulls in Janko etc., but they are still not proven.  It may take Janko 5 years to become as good as Backlund, assuming he can get to that level.

 

Maybe the timing is perfect and we can trade him this year for a young disaffected center and D prospect.  Maybe Janko shows enough in his first season with the Flames.  I just don't want to go from center depth to center drought.

 

 

Ya, a part of me wonders if Backlund is in this position because we don't have any other options yet. Like when/if Bennett passes him. But then, Backlund had earned everything he's achieved.

 

 it could be a good idea to cash in, but then, what if Bennett never passes him?