Is it time to trade Mikael Backlund?

[codynw]

Originally Posted by Rerun

The issue is that he is and always has been, soft on the puck. The stats say he's 6 ft and 198 lbs but he sure doesn't play like it. He's a 3rd /4th line center and will always be that. The league is full of them. The Flames are full of them.

I think if the Flames could get a 2nd round pick for him they would jump on it in a heartbeat. The only reason Knight is in Abby and Backlund isn't is because Knight has a two way contract and Backlund doesn't.

Disagree. I think Knight is in Abbotsford for a full season on purpose, getting valuable playing time that he wouldn't get in Calgary. Backlund is likely getting a final look to see where he fits with the Flames long term.

[irrevocable]

Originally Posted by IgiTang

I vote, Backlund and Cammi to CBJ for Artem Anisimov and a 2nd.

I'd do that in a heartbeat.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by strombad

Don't be fooled, Stajan will be gone and Knight is not better than Backlund or Colborne.

Knight is looking at 4th line duty.

No way in hell Knight won't be better than Backlund. You are seriously underestimating this guys talent.

[CsInMyBlood]

Originally Posted by Rerun

The issue is that he is and always has been, soft on the puck. The stats say he's 6 ft and 198 lbs but he sure doesn't play like it. He's a 3rd /4th line center and will always be that. The league is full of them. The Flames are full of them.

I think if the Flames could get a 2nd round pick for him they would jump on it in a heartbeat. The only reason Knight is in Abby and Backlund isn't is because Knight has a two way contract and Backlund doesn't.

What are you talking about? Backlund has is far from soft on the puck.

Two years ago he had 29 takeaways and 17 giveaways.

Last year he had 28 takeaways and 17 giveaways.

This year he has 9 takeaways and 5 giveaways.

These stats are against tough competition, he isn't being sheltered.

Me thinks you don't actually watch him play but just look at stat lines after that "soft on the puck" statement.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by SeanCharles

^FBI - I agree you definitely can't keep both while developing Colborne, Monahan and Knight so one has to go.

Stajan is 30 and has peaked as a 2/3rd line center. Backs isn't as good as Stajan but Stajan is better to this team as trade bait.

I disagree. The rookies will learn a lot more with Stajan as a team mate than they ever will with Backlund. IMO, Backs has nothing to offer to the developing rookies and the Flames overall, that cannot be found elsewhere with more upside potential.

Upside potential.... that's what I see it coming down to. IMO Backs has either none or very little left and frankly there are players in the system who I believe deserve a chance to be here and have tons of potential..

After all, this is a rebuild. Lets give these players a chance.... especially this first year, which is likely to be the worst year (team performance wise).

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Rerun

I disagree. The rookies will learn a lot more with Stajan as a team mate than they ever will with Backlund.

This should be good, please expand on this.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

This should be good, please expand on this.

Can I?

Stajan has more offensive skill, more defensive skill and WAY more experience.

[thymebalm]

Backlund defender here.

He's a very smart, very good 200ft player.

I can attribute the lack of his point scoring to his crappy linemates, bad ice time, defensive zone starts, etc.

Backlund isn't being given a chance out there. He plays well and gets benched or demoted whereas Glencross coasted through October and never once saw a dip in playing time.

Backlund is a piece. He's a piece we will need, especially as he goes from 25-30. Whether he becomes a Frans Neilsen or a Jordan Staal... we need a guy like Backlund to win.

If Monahan grows into a #1 center, who do you guys slot in behind him? Not Stajan, that's for sure. Backlund is a perfect fit in the 9 spot, and maybe, if his luck changes, the 6 spot.

Please keep him around. And on top of that, please give him linemates with NHL talent.

[codynw]

Originally Posted by thymebalm

Backlund defender here.

He's a very smart, very good 200ft player.

I can attribute the lack of his point scoring to his crappy linemates, bad ice time, defensive zone starts, etc.

Backlund isn't being given a chance out there. He plays well and gets benched or demoted whereas Glencross coasted through October and never once saw a dip in playing time.

Backlund is a piece. He's a piece we will need, especially as he goes from 25-30. Whether he becomes a Frans Neilsen or a Jordan Staal... we need a guy like Backlund to win.

If Monahan grows into a #1 center, who do you guys slot in behind him? Not Stajan, that's for sure. Backlund is a perfect fit in the 9 spot, and maybe, if his luck changes, the 6 spot.

Please keep him around. And on top of that, please give him linemates with NHL talent.

This. They put him on a line with Hudler and Cammalleri for one game and he got 2 points. Then for some reason they broke that line up the very next game.

[Goodlad]

Originally Posted by codynw

This. They put him on a line with Hudler and Cammalleri for one game and he got 2 points. Then for some reason they broke that line up the very next game.

You mean the game where we generated a whopping 5 shots through two periods of play? It wasn't just Backlund's line that got broken up. Hartley tried several different combinations to get the team going.

[Itse]

Again, stop with the lowered expectations please.

Let's say Backlund takes the realistically-hoped-for leaps offensively AND defensively, reaching about 30-35 points per season as a 3rd liner or 40-45 points as a 2nd liner, and becoming a 2-way center with a solid work ethic that truly can be used to shutdown the offensive guys of the other team with regular moderate success. That would make him a 5 years younger version of Matt Stajan almost spot on, only one inch shorter. This is his upside.

Back when we used to be a borderline playoff team, Stajan was our 3rd center, and we sucked at center.

Just look at the centers on teams that are actually playoff teams or close to it. Guys like Stastny, O'Reilly, Granlund, Perreault, Ribeiro, and of course Richards and Thornton/Pavelski. These are 2nd liners. These are guys playing at a 50-60 point pace, some way better. And seriously, even some of these guys are probably not going be good enough come playoff time.

Guys like Backlund and Stajan are centers on teams that are in the bottom of the standings.. This is why you get rid of prospects like Backlund when you are rebuilding and try to either get guys with more upside at their role, or picks.

[Where ru Chris O'Sullivan]

Originally Posted by CsInMyBlood

Backlund has simply been misused by Hartley. He needs more icetime and solid linemates to actually show what he is capable of.

Playing a fourth line role with Jackman/Bouma/McGrattan will not make him succeed.

Playing 10 mins a night doesn't put him in a position to succeed.

Not giving him PP time doesn't put him in a position to succeed.

Backlund started out the season playing strong on the puck, aggressive with a lot of puck pursuit and was playing with a lot of confidence. As his ice time got lower and linemates became scrubs (sorry Jackman/Bouma/McGrattan) his game changed.

I keep hoping 'Artley will put his whipping boys Sven and Mikael on a line together and give em a solid 18-20 mins with PP time for a couple of games to see what they can do.

I mean play your young guys in situations where they have a chance to excel. I thought this was the year where we aren't supposed to win, we are supposed to develop and figure out what we have going forward.

Flames go 0 for 30 on the PP, yet he wont try Backlund and Baertschi on the PP. Frustrates me to no end.

Trading Backlund at this point would be a huge mistake IMO.

Yeah, No. When Stajan was injured at the beginning of the year and Monahan was an uncertain - he garnered top ice time and linemates.

He and he alone has squandered that, he has showed 0 offensive flare, not only this season, but career wide.

You think the coach isn't aware that the PP is slumping? Does that mean its time for McGratton, Jackman, Bouma and Backs? They aren't on the powerplay because they aren't playmakers. If you put your best out there and they go 0-30, it doesn't mean "Fresh (less talented) blood" will turn it around, it simply means they will go 0-80?

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Itse

Can I?

Stajan has more offensive skill, more defensive skill and WAY more experience.

Offensive skill? Backlund Backlund two goals Stajan has 1.Stajan missed some games so I'll give him two to be kind but he gets way more ice then. Backlund is the bigger defensive player, Backlund is our best Defensive forward.

Okay, he wins on experience, whoop de do to that though.

[FlameZilla]

Backs is just starting to develop into a useful NHL player. I see him as one of these late- blooming Swede skill players, much like the Sedins or Naslund. To give up on a player like him in the midst of a rebuild is stupid, unless the return is exceptional. I'd rather ditch Stajan & have Backlund as our de facto 1st line C, or watch him develop as a winger. Fast, defensively responsible & some sweet hands, I shudder at the thought of watching him come of age in another uniform.

[boogerz]

We should trade Backlund... to a team that will give him the opportunity he needs to put it together offensively. He's got a good skill set, good hockey sense, and is a two-way player, yet Sutter let him rot in the bottom6 and Hartley refuses to give him an extended look in the top6.

This kid needs to be either Burke's son or the second coming of Iginla to get quality ice time. It's pathetic.

[Heavy Jack]

We just laughed at Edmonton for the trade they made with us, why go make a trade that would be just as laughable? There is no reason we should be trading/giving up on Backlund, the potential in his game, especially his defensive game, is still far too high to throw the towel in yet.

[Bandwagon In Flames]

Originally Posted by Rerun

I disagree. The rookies will learn a lot more with Stajan as a team mate than they ever will with Backlund. IMO, Backs has nothing to offer to the developing rookies and the Flames overall, that cannot be found elsewhere with more upside potential.

Upside potential.... that's what I see it coming down to. IMO Backs has either none or very little left and frankly there are players in the system who I believe deserve a chance to be here and have tons of potential..

After all, this is a rebuild. Lets give these players a chance.... especially this first year, which is likely to be the worst year (team performance wise).

Yeah you're right, its a rebuild. Lets keep our veteran centre and trade away one of our center prospects.

What. A. Joke.

For the record, Stajan is one of the softest/smallest top 6 centers in the league. What can he teach other Centers who are more skilled and bigger than him? (I'm not a Stajan hater, but I know what kind of player he is).

[Geeoff]

I'd like it if we could somehow get someone for our 3rd line who plays like Backlund but can win faceoffs

[FBI]

Even if Stajan and Backlund are even close to the same value (I disagree, I think Backlund is worth much more than Stajan), you still dump Stajan because he is NOT part of the future..

If we have a cup contending team in 5 years, which player do you think would be around, Stajan or Backlund?

[Itse]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Offensive skill? Backlund Backlund two goals Stajan has 1.Stajan missed some games so I'll give him two to be kind but he gets way more ice then. Backlund is the bigger defensive player, Backlund is our best Defensive forward.

Okay, he wins on experience, whoop de do to that though.

Stajan is the guy goes out there against the top centers of the other team, not Backlund.

Stajan at Backlunds age had scored 100 NHL points, Backlund has around 60. Stajan has been on pace for about 45 points both last season and this season, even counting for the six games he's missed.

Backlund is on pace for 35 points, which would be his career high. This was about his pace last season too.

Stajan is .5 PPG player and Backlund is a .35 PPG player.

So we can agree to disagree on who has more skill, but so far there is simply no contest on which of these guys has gotten better results. Whether or not you think this is an indication of skill is up to you.

As to Backlund not getting chances:

Cammalleri-Backlund-Hudler is the 3rd most frequent line combination this team has gone with this season. In the last 10 games, this has also been Backlunds most common line by far. (Only 20% frequency though, but still.)

Backlund is not being buried.

In comparison, Stajans most common linemates are Glencross and Jones followed by Galiardi and Jones.

Originally Posted by FBI

Even if Stajan and Backlund are even close to the same value (I disagree, I think Backlund is worth much more than Stajan), you still dump Stajan because he is NOT part of the future..

Again, just because Backlund is young does not automatically make him a part of the future any more than Roman Horak or Leland Irving were a part of our future.

The guys that are not good enough need to go. This means Backlund.

If we have a cup contending team in 5 years, which player do you think would be around, Stajan or Backlund?

Trick question, the answer is neither.

Originally Posted by Bandwagon In Flames

For the record, Stajan is one of the softest/smallest top 6 centers in the league.

For the record, Matt Stajan and Mikael backlund are about the same size. Also, Stajan has the same number of hits and takeaways as Backlund, while the latter has had about 30% more TOI this season.