Sven "Fricken" Bartschi!

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Notorious Honey Badger

His 1st year was underwhelming. 2nd year was even worse. I don't call that a sophomore slump I call that a bust.

Then you need to reevaluate your expectations of a guy drafted in the late first round.

Backlund was drafted 24th overall, not 4th overall.

He's twenty-two, people need to calm the eff down.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Notorious Honey Badger

His 1st year was underwhelming. 2nd year was even worse. I don't call that a sophomore slump I call that a bust.

25 points and +4 was underwhelming?

[Notorious Honey Badger]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Then you need to reevaluate your expectations of a guy drafted in the late first round.

Backlund was drafted 24th overall, not 4th overall.

He's twenty-two, people need to calm the eff down.

I am calm I just dont think Backlund is a top 9 forward. At best he will be an energy 4th liner.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Notorious Honey Badger

I am calm I just dont think Backlund is a top 9 forward. At best he will be an energy 4th liner.

Well that's different from claiming bust.

Most guys who are 4th line energy players don't put up 10 goals in their 21 year old rookie reason. It's actually almost laughable you say that, but sounds good.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Where ru Chris O'Sullivan

Until the information is clearly stated, there should be no rest, my original post then stands: "never should we go over 49 contracts - but I'm happy to see Kolanos scoring goals for Abby"

Hopefully the information has been stated clearly enough now.

Regarding 50 contracts, in hindsight it looks like a mistake, even though it's unlikely that it will make a difference in practice. To be fair to Feaster it would be hard to predict the turn events that brought Sven up and then have him perform like he is. Signing Kolanos allowed the Flames to bring him up when they were desperate for replacement bodies and while he didn't do much to help he didn't hurt either. Maybe the alternative would have been worse - that's the problem with what if's.

That said, a GM who is prepared for any eventuality would be wise to keep a contract spot open at all times.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Where ru Chris O'Sullivan

What!?!!?!!?!?
1) I am not versed on the CBA - some posters are saying if we had 49 contracts we could infact (I assume sign him?) and keep him here from now til our season/hopefully post-season ends? (hence wishing we had 49, not 50 contracts in-house).

Ok, more patiently this time since you do seem to be legitimately confused.

There are two issues with keeping Baertschi around. The first is that he is an emergency call up from junior. We can only recall a player in this situation as long as he is the third (or later) emergency recall. Right now those emegency recalls are Nemisz, Desbiens and Baertschi. The moment an injured forward returns (Stempniak, Bouwma, Backlund, Cammalleri), Baertschi has to go back to Portland. The Flames have no option here.

The second issue is the 50 contract limit. As a junior, his contract does not count against our total until he plays his 10th game. Baertschi is already signed (otherwise he couldn't play), but activating his deal would put us at 51, and that can't happen. Thus, he can't play after his ninth game regardless.

Should the Flames have anticipated losing 350 man games to injury necessitating the emergency recall of a kid from junior who just so happens to blow even the most optimistic expectations away? Obviously you think so. I don't, myself. And even if we had the open contract spot, I would still limit him to nine games. Burning a year of Baertschi's deal for what could be as little as four or five extra games is terrible asset management. Far, far worse than the arguments that we should have dealt guys like Sarich or Hannan for even a pitiful draft pick (and really, where would we be now if we had?).

To address the end of your post - nobody is discounting Baertschi. Hell, everyone is just as excited about him as you. But perspective is required, and the good of the franchise has to be considered.

[Notorious Honey Badger]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Well that's different from claiming bust.

Most guys who are 4th line energy players don't put up 10 goals in their 21 year old rookie reason. It's actually almost laughable you say that, but sounds good.

Again I guess this will be another time will tell thing. I was never impressed by Backlund and his regression this year only reinforces that.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by notorious honey badger

his 1st year was underwhelming. 2nd year was even worse. I don't call that a sophomore slump i call that a bust.

lol.

[HELPNEEDED]

Ok, even if he is a 4th line energy forward, he'd be the best at it.

I still dn't consider that a bust for a 24pick

[Where ru Chris O'Sullivan]

Originally Posted by sworkhard

If you'd take a little time and pay attention to the 50 or 60 times it's been explained already, you'd already know this, but here goes.

1. Baertchi is on an emergency recall (our 3rd one at this point in fact). As soon as one more forward is healthy he must be returned due to the CBA and the CHL transfer agreement. However, if for some reason the Flames forwards keep getting injured and we never end up getting at least 1 net healthy forward back, then he could stay until the point in time that 1 net healthy forward does come back. If that's the case until the end of the season, he could stay. However, for him to play more than 9 games regardless of the injury situation, the Flames would have get rid of a contract and burn the 1st year of his ELC.

2. We are not wasting his career by letting him play in Portland in any way. Here's why.
a. Since he's only 19, he's going to continue to get better. Even if he wins the Calder next year, he isn't likely to really come into his own until his 3rd NHL season and nobody should expect him to be a top end player in terms of points before his 4th. This is a recurring pattern for players that start in the NHL right out of Junior, regardless of their skill level.
b. As such, by not burning a year of his NHL deal, you can potentially have him on the team as a bargain in his final years. Having less money tied up in Sven at that point in time means we can spend on better depth and defence resulting in better results as a team.

Regarding Backlund, etc.
For the same reason as 2a, dumping Backlund now is the absolute worst time to do it. Next year will be his 3rd NHL season and should be the one where we can finally see what he's made of. He might not break out in his 3rd season to the same extent some players do, but it's reasonable to expect to see a solid progression next year(becoming a 35-40 point player instead of a 25 point one). If there isn't one, it's time for him to find a niche as shut down two-way bottom 6, face off winning Center or he won't stick around for long. However, you have to keep him around and give him chance to prove he belongs.

Thanks, when I first got in on this thread near page 60, there was certainly not a clear consensus on if we were able to keep him, or how to. 1 of the suggestions there was we would have to waive some one worthy of being taken - hence me proposing backlund (not new information that im not a fan, but a young player like him would be claimed).

I would still believe that (even if we could) burn a year now on his ELC, it would only be worth 1 year less (not years as you've mentioned) wherein he would get paid more. I appreciate your opinion on how by pattern it takes players 3-4 years to hit full stride, but I would suggest from what we've seen, sven isnt a normal player.

There will be plenty of money around to pay Sven with, when Iggy and Kipper are gone. My entire argument is (like it or not, even today sitting as a 10th seed) This may be the best team we will field in the next decade. It's too bad, we cant keep our phenom around to be a part of our march to the post-season.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by fotze

Have the mods ever banned anyone for excessive stupidity? I think a precedent needs to be set.

NHB?

I think he's been banned dozens of times for exactly that.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Notorious Honey Badger

Again I guess this will be another time will tell thing. I was never impressed by Backlund and his regression this year only reinforces that.

In year-two? That's odd. We hold and shift our opinions about various players over time all the time. Maybe I'm just spitballing here, but wouldn't the more prudent observer reserve judgement until his sample size is a little bigger? Does every second-year-player continue to trend upwards towards his potential?

[Notorious Honey Badger]

Wow. Apparently Backlund is a very touchy nerve around these parts.

I'm not the one who over rated Backlund and expected him to produce as a top line centre, that was the the Calgary Flames coaching staff (heard many times on the radio). He was projected to play 1st line centre minutes and produce at that level and he's had 4 goals this year (thereabouts).

If he comes back next year and lights it up then sure, come back and call me stupid. But he's on the fast track to being moved out of Calgary as a reclamation project. Resort to name calling if it makes you feel better.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14;

As a junior, his contract does not count against our total until he plays his 10th game. Baertschi is already signed (otherwise he couldn't play), but activating his deal would put us at 51, and that can't happen. Thus, he can't play after his ninth game

So the good news here, if he goes back to Portland after tonight's game, he can lead them to the Memorial cup and still come back and lead a 4 game sweep of the Rangers in the SCF (if the dates line up)

[Ozy_Flame]

Guess it's back to apple juice and gatorade returning to Portland - he probably loves the drinking age here just as much as the hockey

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Where ru Chris O'Sullivan

I would still believe that (even if we could) burn a year now on his ELC, it would only be worth 1 year less (not years as you've mentioned) wherein he would get paid more. I appreciate your opinion on how by pattern it takes players 3-4 years to hit full stride, but I would suggest from what we've seen, sven isnt a normal player.

It's not even the money either, it's that that money isn't available to pay someone else under the salary cap.

Chicago went from Stanley Cup winner to a team fighting for a low playoff spot when their stars came off their ELCs, simply because of the lost depth due to needing to fir under the salary cap.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Notorious Honey Badger

Wow. Apparently Backlund is a very touchy nerve around these parts.

The touchy nerve is you saying stupid things and then not backing them up.

Regression (after one year)?
Not a slump, that's a bust?

Those things just don't make sense.

I'm not the one who over rated Backlun and expected him to produce as a top line centre, that was the the Calgary Flames coaching staff (heard many times on the radio). He was projected to play 1st line centre minutes and produce at that level and he's had 4 goals this year (thereabouts).

I have no idea if you overrated Backlund or not, maybe you did maybe you didn't.

However, ssaying a 22 year old picked 24th overall is a bust because he isn't a top line player currently suggests that you might have.

If he comes back next year and lights it up then sure, come back and call me stupid. But he's on the fast track to being moved out of Calgary as a reclamation project. Resort to name calling if it makes you feel better.

He doesn't have to "light it up" he has to continue to make improvements in his game and get better.

If he puts up 15 -20 goals and 35-45 points next year I'll be very happy. His two-way game is impressive already for a kid his age.

[Robbob]

I think the year in the WHL was critical for development from Sven. It really is only his second year on NA ice. I also think people tend to forget that he was given every oppurtunity out of camp and just wasn't there. He looks a ton better now then he did in the preseason, especially with the pace and games ramped up.

After seeing him again 6 months later I think he has shown management that he is in their plans next season and they don't need to have a plan B with him.

[landshark]

This kid looked great against the sharks. That's the first I had seen him. Looks like LOTS of room for upward progress.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by landshark

This kid looked great against the sharks. That's the first I had seen him. Looks like LOTS of room for upward progress.

My favorite things about Baerschi?

His IQ and his attitude. He reads the game very well, his 1st intermission interview (vs Coyotes) with Roger Millions was pretty cool to hear.