Quote:
Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks
Agreed, its ok once in a while. But this shouldn't be acceptable. People keep referencing Backlund when Bennet comes up, we don't have another 6-years to wait for Bennett to ripen.
Another thing thoough: Backlund just hit is PRIME @27.
|
I don't agree at all. It's completely ok to take time to develop players, especially as you point out, Backlund has really just reached his prime. It's not like Backlund was uselss prior, just like Bennett isn't useless now. I'm not saying I'm not hoping Bennett doesn't come around much quicker, and I'm not saying it's not important for the Flames for him to come around quicker either, but Bennett will take what he takes to come around, assuming the Flames are developing him right.
What teams need to be cognisant of is when they need players playing in their prime. It's a team need and trade off question about whether the Flames have 6 years (using your example) to wait for Bennett to come around. If the Flames think their true window is before that time frame, then they should probably move Bennett's future potential for some win now talent. If they think their true window is 4 or 5 years down the road, likely makes sense to wait.
For the record I don't think it's going to take Bennett as long as it took Backlund to reach his potential, so I get this is all hypothetical. But what interests me is you said the Flames don't have time to wait for Bennett, but then went on to say Backlund just entered his prime. If you believe the 27 year mark is around when players hit their primes (I think at the very least most are still playing their best hockey at that age anyway), how do you figure the Flames don't have time to wait given the age of almost all of our key players?