Can Ryan take on Backlund’s role; is Backlund who we trade?
If you’re like me, and still convinced that a sizeable contract needs to be shipped out, and you’re also like me, in that you’d still prefer to gain something other than cap space...
I guess what I’m saying is, if you want to move some $$ but you don’t want to just have the movement of those $$ be the only worthwhile return, then who do you move?
To me, now that Valimaki is out, there are only two contracts that we can possibly move out in order to make room and not do a ton of damage to our depth:
Backlund
Frolik
Since the primary goal is to shed $$, then ideally we’d want some combo of picks/prospects in return. If the secondary goal is to actively make the organization better, then the trade option has be Backlund over Frolik.
So which would you do? Dump cap space and settle for whatever you can get back (trade Frolik), or dump cap space and get a decent pick/prospect in return (trade Backlund)?
In order to answer that question, a precursor has to be answered: do we have a player that can absorb enough of Backlund’s role to allow us to turn a potential “get what we can” deal into a “get something we want” deal?
Is Ryan that player, and if so, who fills Ryan’s current role?
Backlunds not done developing Tkachuk yet.
And the only Center that should be dangled is Janko and that's to upgrade his slot. We have 4 nhl centers but if any of them go down we have to move Lindholm or Bennett to C or gamble that Dube is ready.
Backs isnt done here yet. And honestly, I think you slay morale moving that guy as well. Business is business but moving some players blows up the room in a not so good way.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to dammage79 For This Useful Post:
Backlund is about as indispensable as any non-Johnny forward to me
I disagree heavily with the premise that another contract needs to be moved out, and if one does, it should have been Hamonic long before anyone else, though that ship has sailed with the unnecessary Stone buyout. Tkachuk at 7.5 and Mangiapane at sub-1, and it fits. And I am confident BT can pull those off.
__________________
Oliver Kylington is the greatest and best player in the world
Jankowskis development was never going to be linear. Im no longer holding out hope that he's the next Joe Thornton, but I think there's more there than what we've seen.
Hes still a guy you can move around the lineup too.
With Dube and Mangiapane ready for more minutes, Frolik is still the guy that needs to be moved.
If all of a sudden you need to move a center to get Tkachuk signed, we're in trouble.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to sa226 For This Useful Post:
Yeah, if you look at Jankowski’s ice time, line mates and utilization, he has damn fine results. He got over 15 minutes of ice time just 14 times, and got under 10 minutes 14 times as well.
A 3/4 line centre with that little ice time, that gets 14 goals and 32 points, and has been slowly but steadily developing.. well, that is a valuable asset
I think a lot of people forget what most bottom 6 players actually do
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to DeluxeMoustache For This Useful Post:
Trying to think of a game last year when I left thinking holy crap was Backlund amazing tonight...
I definitely remember a few games where he was. Even more the season before. To free up cap we trade Frolik, even if we have to package a pick to do it. Trading Backlund would be an absolutely awful idea... you can only have so many holes in a roster, centre is a bad place to have one.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to VilleN For This Useful Post:
Trying to think of a game last year when I left thinking holy crap was Backlund amazing tonight...
I don't think that's the right metric. I'm not a Backlund fanboy, I was prepared to be amazed when they drafted him and he never panned out as a dazzler.
But he's smart, responsible, and super hardworking.
I'm not sure what game it was last year, but I watched Backlund work a puck for about 20 seconds on the half-boards in the offensive zone. It allowed all new flames to get on the ice and the other team was able to change only one or two guys, because the play was deep in their zone and Backs was just dogging the puck. He could have dumped it, went for a change. That's the James Neal approach. But instead he worked like hell, kept possession, and made things good for the guys coming on.
I don't trade that guy.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to TheSquatch For This Useful Post:
Can Ryan take on Backlund’s role; is Backlund who we trade?
