Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
My own apparent fixation on drawing unwarranted comparisons between Bennett and Draisatl notwithstanding, I am troubled by your focus on continuous player movement as a form of "good asset management." As a few others have noted we agree that management should always be evaluating and exploring every opportunity to improve the team. But just because Bennett might at the moment be the most expendable member of the Flames core, this does not mean it is a good idea to move him. I think it is far too early.
|
Ok, I will attempt to answer your question with a question so you can see how silly this is.
If 120 games isn't sufficient time to make projections and analysis on a player, when is the appropriate threshold? 200 Games? 250? 283?
Fans on this message board were making proclamations and projections on Bennett before he'd played a single game in the NHL. Check out
this thread where people are proclaiming that Bennett is better than Monahan after less than a month of NHL experience.
You can check out some of the main antagonist in this thread GoJetsGo and Gaskal having no problem extrapolating Bennetts career. Gaskal
predicted a 63 point rookie season.
I didn't go around suggesting these posters were idiots for their prognostications and I won't do it now. The question is, why is it appropriate to make projections on a player with basically no NHL experience and not appropriate to make projections on a player with a season and a half of NHL experience?
You say yourself in the above paragraph the organization should always be evaluating their assets but at the same time it's too soon to consider moving him. Why? Why is it too soon to consider moving Bennett? When will be the appropriate time?
Quote:
|
Moreover, I am perplexed by your suggestion that the Flames should trade Backlund at this year's trade deadline. Some posters seem to view every player's purpose as a function of his trade value, and they become obsessed by the idea that every player should be traded when his return is at its peak. This is silly. The Flames are competing to be in the playoffs this Spring and Backlund has been their best forward. He is very important to the Flames success now, and quite likely in the future. The day may come when moving Backlund makes the most sense, but it sure doesn't make any sense this year.
|
Because I don't want a repeat of the Giordano situation, which right now is looking downright awful.
Backlund is playing the best hockey of his pro career, maybe his life, right now. There is basically zero evidence he can sustain this level of play if you consider his previous seasons and shooting percentage. Is Backlund going to be a main piece of the puzzle on a roster when Monahan, Brodie, Hamilton, Gaudreau and Bennett and leading the roster to playoff success in 2-3 years? I don't think so, so it's not worth locking up serious dollars to keep him especially as he threatens to return to the player he was over the length of the deal.
The OTHER aspect of moving Backlund is the asset management sell high equation, but that is a secondary concern to avoiding locking up a player who has a dubious history of putting up points after a couple of successful season with an exaggerated shooting percentage.
Quote:
|
Your thoughts on Bennett and Backlund appear to me to reflect a view of maximizing player values at all costs with little regard for balancing team construction in the short and long term. These look like trades for the sake of making trades—as if the appearance of business on its own is an indication of progress and improvement.
|
First point, maximizing player values at all costs is an integral part of running a successful organization, and the league is littered with examples of teams who didn't cut bait soon enough. Hell, the Flames are a great example of that with Baertschi, but look at Tampa if you want the concrete example with Drouin. Bennett is obviously better than Baertschi and Drouin but the concept is the same.
Where it gets trickiest for the Flames is in understanding that all their best and recent draft picks are playing on the big club right now and that barring a miracle at this point there isn't much help coming in key positions like defense. Without a significant trade, the Flames are going to have to rely on a moon shot to get another quality top 4 defender in time to coincide with the most productive years of the rest of the team's core group. I think you can find second line offensive players easier than you can top 4 defenders, both in the draft and in free agency, so it makes sense to me to explore a trade scenario that sends Bennett one way while returning a top flight, can't miss defender to play with either Hamilton or Brodie to solidify the defensive group.
The whole point of trading Bennett is that he has considerable value and will return a significant asset in a one for one trade scenario.
If Trouba was interested in living in Western Canada that's the kind of trade I see unfolding, and it's exactly the kind of deal the Flames need over the long term to become a contender.