2016/2017 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[Par]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

They are 3 points out of 28th overall. Really how much worse can they get without having a legit offensive RW in the top 6? This season is proving that Backlund's best season isn't changing the fate of the team with guys like Chaisson playing on the top line.

You have to give up something to get something and he's really the only realistic trading chip that could net a top line player or prospect. Would there be growing pains for Jankowski? Absolutely, but top organizations go through this all the time. You think it was easy for the Hawks to part with Brandon Saad? I would hope management isn't getting emotionally attached to any player that's not an elite talent because that's a bad way to operate your hockey team.

How about trading Backlund and going after Martin Hanzal, with Backlund we get a nice package and with Martin Hanzal, we replace Backlund, until Jankowski is ready.

You are right about the Blackhawks and Saad, when that trade happened, all the Blackhawks fans were sad.

[nemanja2306]

A big part of why Backlund hasn't had a year as good as this one is/was his inability to stay healthy.

And when he was healthy, he still a pretty damn good player.

Sent from my Tesla_SP3.1_Lite using Tapatalk

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Monahan For Mayor

To answer my own question.

What about Gallagher + McCarron from MTL ?

The Canadiens are not adding to Gallagher to get Backlund...

Their career years are identical with 47 points. Gallagher did it as a 22 year old and followed it up with 40 points in 53 games last season, a 30 goal pace. He's going through a bad season statistically (ironically matching Backlund's career average...) but they aren't going to give up on him. His contract is also one of the best in the league for what he brings and still has 4 and 1/2 years left. On top of that it was frontloaded. He's making about 3M a year going forward in actual cash.

[Badgers Nose]

I'd rather see flames get out of some bad contracts and give $20-25 million to Backs over the next 4-5 seasons. I think he has 4-5 50ish pt seasons left in him. He's one of our own.

[442scotty]

Trade Backlund? Seriously?

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

The Canadiens are not adding to Gallagher to get Backlund...

Their career years are identical with 47 points. Gallagher did it as a 22 year old and followed it up with 40 points in 53 games last season, a 30 goal pace. He's going through a bad season statistically (ironically matching Backlund's career average...) but they aren't going to give up on him. His contract is also one of the best in the league for what he brings and still has 4 and 1/2 years left. On top of that it was frontloaded. He's making about 3M a year going forward in actual cash.

Yah the flames would be adding to get him from the Canadians IMO.

His contract is really good and his potential is high. Been side tracked by injuries but should bounce back.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by 442scotty

Trade Backlund? Seriously?

He's a UFA next summer and their is a salary cap. Tough decisions have to be made.

[Monahan For Mayor]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

The Canadiens are not adding to Gallagher to get Backlund...

Their career years are identical with 47 points. Gallagher did it as a 22 year old and followed it up with 40 points in 53 games last season, a 30 goal pace. He's going through a bad season statistically (ironically matching Backlund's career average...) but they aren't going to give up on him. His contract is also one of the best in the league for what he brings and still has 4 and 1/2 years left. On top of that it was frontloaded. He's making about 3M a year going forward in actual cash.

MTL has the worst centre depth out of any contending teams IMO. If they don't improve it they don't win anything. You could be write maybe they wouldn't move him. Plekanec is getting old and then they have Galchenyuk and nothing.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by 442scotty

Trade Backlund? Seriously?

While I'm not advocating the trade. Why not trade a player when his value had never been higher? On a great deal for what he provides. Will likely get his largest contract when it comes due at the end of next season when he will be close to 29 years old.

I'm not convinced it's the right thing, but it's not a crazy notion for this team, that is struggling to be in the playoffs with Backlund should be looking at options that include optimizing the value from a player who is getting very close to 30 years old, playing great hockey with only one more season on his contract.

[Par]

Originally Posted by 442scotty

Trade Backlund? Seriously?

It is not a fun thing but something has to happen and it will be a interesting off season for the Calgary Flames.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Monahan For Mayor

MTL has the worst centre depth out of any contending teams IMO. If they don't improve it they don't win anything. You could be write maybe they wouldn't move him. Plekanec is getting old and then they have Galchenyuk and nothing.

Radulov is not signed beyond this year, and with Gallagher out, Byron has been their second line RW.

They have worse RW depth with Gallagher gone then they do center depth. They are moving a better player from a position of weakness to fit another position of weakness, and giving up a past 1st round pick who's trending decently. Yeah, they aren't going to entertain that deal at all.

A deal around Gallagher and Backlund isn't crazy if Montreal re-signs Radulov, but it's the Flames who are adding.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

He's a UFA next summer and their is a salary cap. Tough decisions have to be made.

Pretty funny how we were so quick to overpay Brouwer but don't want to pay Backlund fair value as a much more important player for this team.

[Monahan For Mayor]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Radulov is not signed beyond this year, and with Gallagher out, Byron has been their second line RW.

They have worse RW depth with Gallagher gone then they do center depth. They are moving a better player from a position of weakness to fit another position of weakness, and giving up a past 1st round pick who's trending decently. Yeah, they aren't going to entertain that deal at all.

A deal around Gallagher and Backlund isn't crazy, but it's the Flames who are adding.

That could be true. I would still do Backs For Gallagher straight up, I'd probably even slightly add. Doesn't Sven Adrigheto(spelling) project as a top 6 rw tho. And I don't think they will have a problem signing Radulov again.

[Muta]

I think Gallagher would be just what this team could use.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Pretty funny how we were so quick to overpay Brouwer but don't want to pay Backlund fair value as a much more important player for this team.

Some thoughts:

- Well now we've paid Brouwer right or wrong, and we can only have so many "UFA" deals on the team. Maybe moving Brouwer to make room for Backlund is the way to go.
- Let's say Brouwer contract was a mistake, are you advocating that we should make the same mistake again, simply because we've made it before?
- Finally, you can't look at these things in a bubble. Theoretically (and I say that so as to not get everyone up in arms about Bennett's play this year), the Flames have their two ponies at center. Truth of the matter is, they can't afford to be paying 3 players top dollar at center in 4 years when this team is likely going to be at it's best. They will need to have the dollars to round out the line up, on wing, in net, on D.

So if the Flames have come to the conclusion already that Bennett isn't going to be the center they wanted, and he's either going to be a winger, or not a part of this team, then I agree, contemplating whether Backlund is good enough, and going to be playing well enough given his age when this team is going to peak is something they should very much be considering when deciding on whether in a year from now they'd like him to be on the team and eating up a healthy chunk of our cash.

But as you can see, it's going to be pretty complicated decision, that involves some future projecting when it comes to making the right decision on Backlund.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Pretty funny how we were so quick to overpay Brouwer but don't want to pay Backlund fair value as a much more important player for this team.

That's an assumption on your part though. Backlund has a contract until July 1st 2018 so new contract negotiations can't even start until this summer. For all we know Treliving and company are ready and willing to pay him fair value.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by New Era

I think people should see Backlund what he is, a third line center having a career year on an underperforming team.

He's the #1 centre on this team. He's a better all-around player than Monahan.

Trade Backlund and the fate of this team will depend on whether or not Bennett turns into a reliable #2 centre. Does management want to take that risk? I'm not sure I would.

Originally Posted by Monahan For Mayor

What teams could be targeting Backlund ? Who have a scoring RS RW to move in return ?

Montreal is the obvious candidate. But they're going for it now, so they won't move a contributing roster player. You'd be looking at picks and prospects, with the centrepiece being Scherback and/or a 1st.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Some thoughts:

- Well now we've paid Brouwer right or wrong, and we can only have so many "UFA" deals on the team. Maybe moving Brouwer to make room for Backlund is the way to go.
- Let's say Brouwer contract was a mistake, are you advocating that we should make the same mistake again, simply because we've made it before?
- Finally, you can't look at these things in a bubble. Theoretically (and I say that so as to not get everyone up in arms about Bennett's play this year), the Flames have their two ponies at center. Truth of the matter is, they can't afford to be paying 3 players top dollar at center in 4 years when this team is likely going to be at it's best. They will need to have the dollars to round out the line up, on wing, in net, on D.

So if the Flames have come to the conclusion already that Bennett isn't going to be the center they wanted, and he's either going to be a winger, or not a part of this team, then I agree, contemplating whether Backlund is good enough, and going to be playing well enough given his age when this team is going to peak is something they should very much be considering when deciding on whether in a year from now they'd like him to be on the team and eating up a healthy chunk of our cash.

But as you can see, it's going to be pretty complicated decision, that involves some future projecting when it comes to making the right decision on Backlund.

Advocating the Flames to make the same mistake? Brouwer at his best hasn't been as good as Backlund since he was 23. I get what you're saying... Brouwer has been paid, it's done, options are limited. But Backlund has been the Flames best centre for a while now. He's the only centre on the team that has an understanding of the defensive aspect of the game. He gives Monahan and Bennett easier minutes. Backlund's impact goes beyond his own play on the ice. As bad as things have been this season, you remove Backlund and this team completely falls apart.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Derek Engelland might get a nice little return this year. Other than maybe Dougie Hamilton, he's been the Flames most consistent defenceman. For a contender looking for a solid guy to play on the bottom pairing, he's going to be very attractive.

I'm not sure what term he has left though....

[MrMastodonFarm]

Actually Monahan has been very good defensively this season, after a rocky start, that's at least one thing Gulutzen has gotten right. I'd actually like to see him used on the PK more, think it would get him engaged in the game instead of cooling off on the bench during those long penalty kills.

That's a whole different discussion though.