2021 Offseason Thread

[kehatch]

2 hours ago, MP5029 said:

Im wondering if BT may sign Bozak? He may be a good 3rd line option for a year on the cheap for C or RW?  could be a nice value add if they us Coleman on the 2nd line RW…

 

Gaudreau/Monahan/Lindholm 

Tachuck/Backlund/Coleman 

Manji/ Bozak/Dube

 

im not 100% with this but, it could open up 3 balanced but defensive responsible scoring lines? 

 

I think there is a decent chance Treliving gets a C. Eichel is a long shot, but the game changer. Dvorak is an option. But barring that Boazk would be a good target. Rumor is he is already signed though, just not announced. 

[The_Tribal Chief]

i honestly think eichel isnt going anywhere sabres are asking to much and there arnt alot of teams no matter how good he is willing to pay it or he would be gone

[Horsman1]

On 8/18/2021 at 8:53 PM, robrob74 said:

 

 

If he is waiting to do other moves after Eichel, I hope he isn't waiting too long. Could be a dangerous game and end up with a poor roster.

Treliving is waiting for his grandmother to nod off so he can sneak out and play

 

[Horsman1]

1 hour ago, kehatch said:

 

I think there is a decent chance Treliving gets a C. Eichel is a long shot, but the game changer. Dvorak is an option. But barring that Boazk would be a good target. Rumor is he is already signed though, just not announced. 

the flames as an organization have killed any potential offensive output from Backlund..he is now at best a number 3 center.. but wayyyyy overpaid for that position

 

[kehatch]

 

43 minutes ago, Horsman1 said:

the flames as an organization have killed any potential offensive output from Backlund..he is now at best a number 3 center.. but wayyyyy overpaid for that position

 

 

Backlund is in the top 50 in scoring among Cs in the last 5 seasons, and his offensive production was on par with they last season. He does it with limited PP time and tough EV time. You can call him a third liner if you want, but his minutes, utilization, and production don't reflect that. 

 

As far as the Flames killing his production. He has been a mid 40 point layer virtually since breaking out, and is is at that mark every single season. 

 

How exactly did the Flames "kill" his offensive output? 

 

I do think there was a small drop off in his overall game last season. That is more to do with age then anything else. So I do think the term in his contract is mildly concerning. But I don't agree with your description. 

[rickross]

I see what he’s saying in terms of “killed any potential offensive output” for Backlund. He was considered more offensive minded but Sutter ultimately made him the 2 way C he is today. Backlund underwent a pretty painful development under Sutter but he is a more complete and better player today because of it. 
 

My knock against Backlund has been he’s soft as Charmin, he usually comes on later in the season and he can take some poor penalties during high stakes games. Other than that he’s still a capable 2-3C. 
 

Regardless BT still has to find ways to improve this team, and running out of time     . Resigning Vali was good, Zadorov appears to be decent value with no risk in term. We are still a few moves away from contending. 

[kehatch]

31 minutes ago, rickross said:

I see what he’s saying in terms of “killed any potential offensive output” for Backlund. He was considered more offensive minded but Sutter ultimately made him the 2 way C he is today. Backlund underwent a pretty painful development under Sutter but he is a more complete and better player today because of it. 
 

My knock against Backlund has been he’s soft as Charmin, he usually comes on later in the season and he can take some poor penalties during high stakes games. Other than that he’s still a capable 2-3C. 
 

Regardless BT still has to find ways to improve this team, and running out of time     . Resigning Vali was good, Zadorov appears to be decent value with no risk in term. We are still a few moves away from contending. 

 

I think you two are expecting too much. Backlund was never projected to be a P/PG type player. He is a top 50 point produce in the NHL (among Cs) and for a guy picked late in the first round that's a win. 

 

In terms of his draft, he is 13 overall in points. The only 3 Cs with more points were all top 10 picks, and of them only Couture is a guy anyone would take over Backlund. 

 

Backlund is a huge success offensively and defensively given where he was drafted. The term "killed all offensive output" isn't accurate. 

[cross16]

I don’t think most fans will every truly understand Backlund. He’s going to go down as one of the most misunderstood Flames of all time. 

[The_People1]

11 hours ago, cross16 said:

I don’t think most fans will every truly understand Backlund. He’s going to go down as one of the most misunderstood Flames of all time. 

 

Backlund has been one of the most polarizing Flames of all time.  Depending on who you ask, he's either totally overrated or totally underrated.

 

For me, he's annoyed me for much of his earlier career because it SO clear to me early on that he's never going to be a scoring Center.  He likely holds the Flames record for most missed shots from point blank in the slot.  I mean there's been many single season holders from Blake Comeau to Chris Clark to Sam Bennett but Backlund has been a lasting Flames his entire career... anyways, aside from the one 53-point season, he's never lived up to his draft position from a points perspective.  His draft hype, offensive ice time/line mates, etc... oh, and I've blamed him for year for getting offensive ice time over developing Sam Bennett in an offensive role because it wasn't like Backlund was lighting it up either.

 

But lately, I've come to accept him because at the end of the day, Backlund is an advanced stats star and I must accept objective data despite the eyeball test.  He simply tilts the ice in the Flames favour when he's on the ice.  And honestly, if Backlund had any kind of finish to his offense, then he'd be in the same conversation as a Patrice Bergeron or something like that.  When Backlund is not scoring, he's still doing positive things.  It will always frustrate me that he squanders so many scoring chances but I just have to accept that he does everything else well.

[jjgallow]

On 8/18/2021 at 3:56 PM, conundrumed said:

Seems the offseason has gotten long in the tooth for much meaningful move-wise.

Wait for PTOs?

 

I absolutely believe that there is a wealth of talent in PTOs.

 

It does however require a very strong scouting base (not confident we have this) and a willingness to take chances (nope).

 

Anyway....as much as I believe in PTOs, even I don't think they would change our immediate situation.    They are more for long term benefit.   I keep hearing on here that the roster we see now is NOT the roster we'll see when the season starts.

 

Not so sure about that.    But I'll save the rant that follows.

[travel_dude]

3 hours ago, The_People1 said:

But lately, I've come to accept him because at the end of the day, Backlund is an advanced stats star and I must accept objective data despite the eyeball test.  He simply tilts the ice in the Flames favour when he's on the ice.  And honestly, if Backlund had any kind of finish to his offense, then he'd be in the same conversation as a Patrice Bergeron or something like that.  When Backlund is not scoring, he's still doing positive things.  It will always frustrate me that he squanders so many scoring chances but I just have to accept that he does everything else well.

 

I don't know what it is about him.  He goes to the net and basically has nobody touching him.  He has a keen sense for where to be for a quick shot into the net.  He can skate fairly quickly.  He turns the play around to start offense.  Other players get decent stats playing with him.  And as you say, he's a positive player whenever he's on the ice.  Maybe having a player like Gaudreau on his line is the only cure.  I dunno.  I have seen him turn a 3 on 1 play into a puck into the missed shot behind the net.  Like he thinks he's always going to miss the net, so he wills the puck away from it.

 

He's polarizing because he can make you scream at the TV and then praise him.  The biggest worry is that he may spiral sooner than later.  Not old by any stretch of the imagination, but at the age where you wonder if a drop off is coming.  

[rickross]

On 8/21/2021 at 6:08 AM, kehatch said:

 

I think you two are expecting too much. Backlund was never projected to be a P/PG type player. He is a top 50 point produce in the NHL (among Cs) and for a guy picked late in the first round that's a win. 

 

In terms of his draft, he is 13 overall in points. The only 3 Cs with more points were all top 10 picks, and of them only Couture is a guy anyone would take over Backlund. 

 

Backlund is a huge success offensively and defensively given where he was drafted. The term "killed all offensive output" isn't accurate. 

Whoever said Backlund was expected to be a PPG player? I don’t know anyone who projected Backlund to be that kind of player. Like I said he’s still a capable 2/3C but I just think he plays soft and takes untimely penalties. 
 

Calling him a “huge success offensively..” is overkill. His defensive game outweighs his offensive one by a decent margin. Not a bad thing , just a more accurate description of the player. 

[sak22]

13 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Backlund has been one of the most polarizing Flames of all time.  Depending on who you ask, he's either totally overrated or totally underrated.

 

For me, he's annoyed me for much of his earlier career because it SO clear to me early on that he's never going to be a scoring Center.  He likely holds the Flames record for most missed shots from point blank in the slot.  I mean there's been many single season holders from Blake Comeau to Chris Clark to Sam Bennett but Backlund has been a lasting Flames his entire career... anyways, aside from the one 53-point season, he's never lived up to his draft position from a points perspective.  His draft hype, offensive ice time/line mates, etc... oh, and I've blamed him for year for getting offensive ice time over developing Sam Bennett in an offensive role because it wasn't like Backlund was lighting it up either.

 

But lately, I've come to accept him because at the end of the day, Backlund is an advanced stats star and I must accept objective data despite the eyeball test.  He simply tilts the ice in the Flames favour when he's on the ice.  And honestly, if Backlund had any kind of finish to his offense, then he'd be in the same conversation as a Patrice Bergeron or something like that.  When Backlund is not scoring, he's still doing positive things.  It will always frustrate me that he squanders so many scoring chances but I just have to accept that he does everything else well.

I don't know what his draft position indicates, not every #1 is created equal and not every #24 is as well, some very good players have gone in that slot, some big disappointments have as well..  But your usually getting a middle 6F or bottom 4D in the 20's, with a couple exceptions, but rarely a #1C.  But considering only Jamie Benn, Wayne Simmonds, PK Subban and David Perron that were drafted after Backlund have outproduced him.  But on how many guys has Backlund outproduced/played that were drafted ahead of him?  I counted 13 not including Cherapanov, plus he has aged better than Kyle Turris who went 3rd and Backlund's best season was still better than any season Sam Gagner had.  So I don't know what draft position has to do with anything, it wasn't the best draft year and when you compare to everyone else that year Backlund was a steal at 24.  For comparison the linked video gives a pretty good summary.

 

Redrafting the 2007 NHL Entry Draft - YouTube

 

[kehatch]

A list of players drafted 24 since Backlund: Mattias Tedenby/Marcus Johansson/Kevin Hayes/Matt Puempel/Malcolm Subban/Hunter Shinkaruk/Jared McCann/Travis Konecny/Max Jones/Kristian Vesalainen/Filip Johansson.  Getting a 45 point C who is one of the better defensive players in the league at 24th is exceptional. 

 

Even take away his defensive ability and the situations he plays in.  Getting a 45 point C late in the 1st is a win.  But add that stuff back in and its a home run.  Backlund has started in the defensive zone more often then any other Flames regular C over the past 5 seasons, its often against the other teams top lines, and he has still has the best possession numbers among Calgary Cs.   He has often done it with limited line mates, and the line mates have all produced at a higher rate on his line then off.  That includes recent guys like Tkachuk and Mangiapane.  But it also includes guys like Bouma and Colborne that had career seasons playing next to him.  The "Backlund Bump" is real.  

 

Over the last 5 seasons Backlund had 164 points even strength.  Monahan had 195.  To put that in perspective, every 11 games Monahan averaged 1 more point.  That is with Backlund tasked with the defensive zone assignments and Monahan getting the offensive assignments.  Funny enough, Backlund had 13 SH points over that time further narrowing the gap. 

 

Don't get me wrong, Monahan is the better offensive player.  I also know, like every player, Backlund has his flaws.  But he is disappointing because he isn't Patrice Bergeron?  The Flames "killed all potential offensive output"?  The guy has played almost 750 regular season games as a Flame, played the toughest minutes of any Flames forward, and he has done very well over that time.  I have no idea why so many Flames fans crap on the guy.  

[cross16]

1 hour ago, kehatch said:

A list of players drafted 24 since Backlund: Mattias Tedenby/Marcus Johansson/Kevin Hayes/Matt Puempel/Malcolm Subban/Hunter Shinkaruk/Jared McCann/Travis Konecny/Max Jones/Kristian Vesalainen/Filip Johansson.  Getting a 45 point C who is one of the better defensive players in the league at 24th is exceptional. 

 

Even take away his defensive ability and the situations he plays in.  Getting a 45 point C late in the 1st is a win.  But add that stuff back in and its a home run.  Backlund has started in the defensive zone more often then any other Flames regular C over the past 5 seasons, its often against the other teams top lines, and he has still has the best possession numbers among Calgary Cs.   He has often done it with limited line mates, and the line mates have all produced at a higher rate on his line then off.  That includes recent guys like Tkachuk and Mangiapane.  But it also includes guys like Bouma and Colborne that had career seasons playing next to him.  The "Backlund Bump" is real.  

 

Over the last 5 seasons Backlund had 164 points even strength.  Monahan had 195.  To put that in perspective, every 11 games Monahan averaged 1 more point.  That is with Backlund tasked with the defensive zone assignments and Monahan getting the offensive assignments.  Funny enough, Backlund had 13 SH points over that time further narrowing the gap. 

 

Don't get me wrong, Monahan is the better offensive player.  I also know, like every player, Backlund has his flaws.  But he is disappointing because he isn't Patrice Bergeron?  The Flames "killed all potential offensive output"?  The guy has played almost 750 regular season games as a Flame, played the toughest minutes of any Flames forward, and he has done very well over that time.  I have no idea why so many Flames fans crap on the guy.  

no to mention the only reason he doesn’t have point totals consistently in the 50-60 range is because he’s not one of their main PP guys, and is one of their best penalty killers. Don’t understand why you would knock a player for circumstances he didn’t create. 
his 5on5 numbers are constantly in the top 50 for centers for the majority of his career. It’s not even just crazy to suggest his offense output was stunted it’s just flat out wrong. 

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, sak22 said:

I don't know what his draft position indicates, not every #1 is created equal and not every #24 is as well, some very good players have gone in that slot, some big disappointments have as well..  But your usually getting a middle 6F or bottom 4D in the 20's, with a couple exceptions, but rarely a #1C.  But considering only Jamie Benn, Wayne Simmonds, PK Subban and David Perron that were drafted after Backlund have outproduced him.  But on how many guys has Backlund outproduced/played that were drafted ahead of him?  I counted 13 not including Cherapanov, plus he has aged better than Kyle Turris who went 3rd and Backlund's best season was still better than any season Sam Gagner had.  So I don't know what draft position has to do with anything, it wasn't the best draft year and when you compare to everyone else that year Backlund was a steal at 24.  For comparison the linked video gives a pretty good summary.

 

Redrafting the 2007 NHL Entry Draft - YouTube

 

 

No, he was the #2 ranked European going into the draft and fell because of a knee injury.  Anyways, he was said to be a steal in the draft with future #1 Center potential.  And at that time, the Flames really needed a #1 Center.  Expectations were higher than what it should have been, let's put it that way.  And so unironically, even his draft hype is polarizing.  Kek.

[jjgallow]

45 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

No, he was the #2 ranked European going into the draft and fell because of a knee injury.  Anyways, he was said to be a steal in the draft with future #1 Center potential.  And at that time, the Flames really needed a #1 Center.  Expectations were higher than what it should have been, let's put it that way.  And so unironically, even his draft hype is polarizing.  Kek.

 

He really was a steal, even looking back now

an excellent BPA pick.   Anyone who's watched enough of him knows he never reached his full potential.   There was nothing wrong with that #1C projection.   Despite that, he was still a great pick

[sak22]

38 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

No, he was the #2 ranked European going into the draft and fell because of a knee injury.  Anyways, he was said to be a steal in the draft with future #1 Center potential.  And at that time, the Flames really needed a #1 Center.  Expectations were higher than what it should have been, let's put it that way.  And so unironically, even his draft hype is polarizing.  Kek.

So were Kyle Turris, Sam Gagner in that draft.  I don't know who honestly can say either ever lived up to that billing, personally I don't remember anything about him being a high potential #1, I think this fanbase just gets a little too carried away with certain prospects at that time Backlund didn't fit the mold of other previous picks like Nystrom, Phaneuf, Chucko, or Pelech, we saw him as something he wasn't going to become based on what we didn't have, which is similar to Baertschi a few years later.  Your complaint about Backlund was he was #2 when the team should've played Bennett there, I don't agree.  Backlund was never gifted #2, he was planted on #4 and the team did a lot to keep him there (bringing in Jokinen, Morrison, moving Moss to C, Cervenka), Backlund worked his way up the lineup despite not always having the best of wingers.  

[The_People1]

33 minutes ago, sak22 said:

So were Kyle Turris, Sam Gagner in that draft.  I don't know who honestly can say either ever lived up to that billing, personally I don't remember anything about him being a high potential #1, I think this fanbase just gets a little too carried away with certain prospects at that time Backlund didn't fit the mold of other previous picks like Nystrom, Phaneuf, Chucko, or Pelech, we saw him as something he wasn't going to become based on what we didn't have, which is similar to Baertschi a few years later.  Your complaint about Backlund was he was #2 when the team should've played Bennett there, I don't agree.  Backlund was never gifted #2, he was planted on #4 and the team did a lot to keep him there (bringing in Jokinen, Morrison, moving Moss to C, Cervenka), Backlund worked his way up the lineup despite not always having the best of wingers.  

 

Backlund deserved to be 2nd line Center the past few years absolutely.  No debate there, he worked his way up and deserved it.

 

That's not the point because trying to win games was the wrong path to take in the first place (and I'm sure many would disagree with me and stop reading right there).

 

If our plan was to have Monahan 1st line C, Bennett 2nd line C, and Backlund 3rd line C, then we should've developed Bennett that way.  In other words, accept losing 50-games in a row to play Bennett in a scoring role if that's what it takes because if it works in the end, then the end justifies the means.  

 

So now what?  Now we have Backlund aging into a 3rd line C at best and Sam Bennett is scoring with another team as a 2nd line C... Because would not accept losing to develop the team.  If Bennett is still here, then he would still be 4th line LW because we ways have to win the next game.

 

Anyways, you can argue none of this is Backlund's fault but rightly or wrongly, he blocked the path of Sam Bennett's development and so had he been gone, then rainbows and sunshine with Bennett as our 2nd line C.

[sak22]

29 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Backlund deserved to be 2nd line Center the past few years absolutely.  No debate there, he worked his way up and deserved it.

 

That's not the point because trying to win games was the wrong path to take in the first place (and I'm sure many would disagree with me and stop reading right there).

 

If our plan was to have Monahan 1st line C, Bennett 2nd line C, and Backlund 3rd line C, then we should've developed Bennett that way.  In other words, accept losing 50-games in a row to play Bennett in a scoring role if that's what it takes because if it works in the end, then the end justifies the means.  

 

So now what?  Now we have Backlund aging into a 3rd line C at best and Sam Bennett is scoring with another team as a 2nd line C... Because would not accept losing to develop the team.  If Bennett is still here, then he would still be 4th line LW because we ways have to win the next game.

 

Anyways, you can argue none of this is Backlund's fault but rightly or wrongly, he blocked the path of Sam Bennett's development and so had he been gone, then rainbows and sunshine with Bennett as our 2nd line C.

If you accept losing you create the losing culture.  See Buffalo.  Also not trying to win while your best players are performing is a good way to piss off your best players.  Also see Buffalo.  

[The_People1]

47 minutes ago, sak22 said:

If you accept losing you create the losing culture.  See Buffalo.  Also not trying to win while your best players are performing is a good way to piss off your best players.  Also see Buffalo.  

 

Precisely.  Imagine Backlund wasn't there the entire time and we had to play Bennett there.  All this moral argument stuff conveniently gone.

[Horsman1]

21 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Backlund has been one of the most polarizing Flames of all time.  Depending on who you ask, he's either totally overrated or totally underrated.

 

For me, he's annoyed me for much of his earlier career because it SO clear to me early on that he's never going to be a scoring Center.  He likely holds the Flames record for most missed shots from point blank in the slot.  I mean there's been many single season holders from Blake Comeau to Chris Clark to Sam Bennett but Backlund has been a lasting Flames his entire career... anyways, aside from the one 53-point season, he's never lived up to his draft position from a points perspective.  His draft hype, offensive ice time/line mates, etc... oh, and I've blamed him for year for getting offensive ice time over developing Sam Bennett in an offensive role because it wasn't like Backlund was lighting it up either.

 

But lately, I've come to accept him because at the end of the day, Backlund is an advanced stats star and I must accept objective data despite the eyeball test.  He simply tilts the ice in the Flames favour when he's on the ice.  And honestly, if Backlund had any kind of finish to his offense, then he'd be in the same conversation as a Patrice Bergeron or something like that.  When Backlund is not scoring, he's still doing positive things.  It will always frustrate me that he squanders so many scoring chances but I just have to accept that he does everything else well.

hey now.. I never saidI didn\tlike Backlund.. in fact I do  but.. he's never consistently been the number 2 center here like conroy or Gilmour.. he;s been the  fall back defensive 3rd line center.. in fact.. the perfect third line center.. but in a cap world.. he'sgetting paid too much

 

[kehatch]

Backlund was never projected to be a top line C any more then Zary is. Maybe some fans though he could be, but I don't think I have ever seen a C projected to be a top line guy that wasn't already projected to go top 5. If anyone honestly felt he was going to be a number 1 C he never would have fell to 24.

[sak22]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

Precisely.  Imagine Backlund wasn't there the entire time and we had to play Bennett there.  All this moral argument stuff conveniently gone.

I don't imagine, people always use the best case scenario in these what if's.  If Backlund isn't around does Tkachuk become what he is?  I still don't know if Bennett becomes anything significant, whereas Tkachuk became an all-star, where his development may have changed if he never played with someone like Backlund.  It's not hard to imagine a #4 pick not living up to his draft position because there is usually 1 or 2 top 5 picks every year, just unfortunate it happens the only time the Flames picked there.

[kehatch]

20 minutes ago, sak22 said:

I don't imagine, people always use the best case scenario in these what if's.  If Backlund isn't around does Tkachuk become what he is?  I still don't know if Bennett becomes anything significant, whereas Tkachuk became an all-star, where his development may have changed if he never played with someone like Backlund.  It's not hard to imagine a #4 pick not living up to his draft position because there is usually 1 or 2 top 5 picks every year, just unfortunate it happens the only time the Flames picked there.

 

Exactly. Most teams develop in cycles.

 

If you have a team capable of being competitive then you invest in being competitive for as long as you can. You hope you get a deep run or three during this time, and if things go very well a cup. 

 

When that isn't an option anymore, you spend your assets on as many picks and prospects as you can get, and you hope like crazy you pick high in a draft that has the caliber of prospects you need. 

 

But once those prospects are ready to join the team you surround them with the type of players you need to instill the right culture, including the demand to win. The combination of the evolving prospects combined with the support players makes you competitive, so you start investing in being competitive again. 

 

Guys like Backlund show players the right way to play, and they are able to take the tough minutes to shelter players that might need it. I would have loved if Bennett would have taken Backlund job. He had 6 years to do it. But gifting Bennett the job and enduring a long bunch of losses while he figures it out, if he figures it out, isn't how you develop a team full of good players.