[News] With the 21st overall pick Flames select C Mark Jankowski

[Steve Bozek]

Business as usual on the Jankowski thread

[Badgers Nose]

How confident are the Flames in Janko when looking at Backlund's contract situation?

On the one hand, Backs could be a Selke candidate in a couple of years. On the other he could fetch quite a bit - potentially filling a hole (1g or top 4D) if you think Janko can play 3C next year. Bennett's year complicates this.

There is every indication that Janko could take that next step. He's had a great rookie season in the AHL. But for much of 2016/7 Backs was not the 3C but rather then 1C. What if that happens again?

I think the hope was that this past season Bennett and Janko were going to make Backs' future with the Flames easy to decide.

The centre log jam is a close second to sorting our goalies. Good problem to have.

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by guuar

IF we gave up;

2017 1st Round Pick
2018 2nd Round Pick
Mark Jankowski
Oliver Kylington
Jon Gillies

for

Matt Murray

Your proposal is significantly worse than any Flames-related proposal I see on HF, which should say boatloads about how ####ing awful it is.

[TheScorpion]

Coming from a guy who once upon a time proposed a Baertschi for Drouin + Kucherov trade on HF:

guuar, that proposal is just terrible.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

How confident are the Flames in Janko when looking at Backlund's contract situation?

On the one hand, Backs could be a Selke candidate in a couple of years. On the other he could fetch quite a bit - potentially filling a hole (1g or top 4D) if you think Janko can play 3C next year. Bennett's year complicates this.

There is every indication that Janko could take that next step. He's had a great rookie season in the AHL. But for much of 2016/7 Backs was not the 3C but rather then 1C. What if that happens again?

I think the hope was that this past season Bennett and Janko were going to make Backs' future with the Flames easy to decide.

The centre log jam is a close second to sorting our goalies. Good problem to have.

I don't see our centre situation as a logjam until prospects pan out. To me we've got

1. Monahan
2. Backlund
3. Bennett (hope)
4. Stajan (4th line, likely gone this off season and for sure next)
5. Jankowski (hope)
6. Lazar (faint hope)


So you trade Backlund and potentially drop yourself to

1. Monahan
2. Bennett (hope)
3. Jankowski (hope)
4. Lazar (faint hope)

You deal from a position of strength, but I'd argue centre is a position of potential at this point. We are not stacked at centre like the Calgarypuck narrative suggests, imo. We are in the process of hoping to get a strong top four centres out of five guys. That's not a logjam.

[calgaryblood]

Center is a position of weakness for the Flames. It's mind boggling people think otherwise. We have one good defensive Center and then a lot of hope.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by jayswin

I don't see our centre situation as a logjam until prospects pan out. To me we've got

1. Monahan
2. Backlund
3. Bennett (hope)
4. Stajan (4th line, likely gone this off season and for sure next)
5. Jankowski (hope)
6. Lazar (faint hope)


So you trade Backlund and potentially drop yourself to

1. Monahan
2. Bennett (hope)
3. Jankowski (hope)
4. Lazar (faint hope)

You deal from a position of strength, but I'd argue centre is a position of potential at this point. We are not stacked at centre like the Calgarypuck narrative suggests, imo.

This is why if the Flames are going to sign a bigger name free agent forward this off-season, I hope it's Hanzal. Much more useful all around player and moving a center to the wing is much more successfully done than moving a winger to center.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by guuar

...For what it's going to cost to find out we are better off giving 23 year old Jon Gillies the opportunity he deserves.

All this talk about trading away very good young players for something we may already have...

You didn't answer the question. The only poster talking about trading away very good young players is you in your outrageous trade proposal for Matt Murray.

So, again: When was the last time ANY NHL team surrendered a package of assets like this in a trade? And for a goaltender, no less?

[calgaryblood]

Goaltenders, historically have not gotten better than a second rounder and a prospect. They rarely ever get a better package than that.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Center is a position of weakness for the Flames. It's mind boggling people think otherwise. We have one good defensive Center and then a lot of hope.

Ok, well we don't have to go all the way to the other end and say it's a position of weakness because that's just as false.

Monahan is a good #1, Backlund is a good #2, and then we have a rookie with a huge amount of potential in the #3 spot and a very, very solid #4. On top of that, you've got one of the best players in the AHL knocking on the door and Lazar who is a total wildcard.

There is middle ground between it being a position of strength and one of weakness. Both are just as wrong. We've got solid pieces and good potential down the lineup. It's definitely far from weak.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by guuar
IF we gave up;

2017 1st Round Pick
2018 2nd Round Pick
Mark Jankowski
Oliver Kylington
Jon Gillies

for

Matt Murray

I don't think you spelled Carey Price properly because what you've got here is an outright terrible trade proposal that needs to be shot into the sun.

Nobody guts their prospect base with three good to very good prospects and draft picks for a goalie.

Go back to playing whatever version of EA NHL that you have, because that's a video game trade.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I don't think you spelled Carey Price properly because what you've got here is an outright terrible trade proposal that needs to be shot into the sun...

I am not even sure a NHL team would be comfortable surrendering this package in exchange for Carey Price.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Ok, well we don't have to go all the way to the other end and say it's a position of weakness because that's just as false.

Monahan is a good #1, Backlund is a good #2, and then we have a rookie with a huge amount of potential in the #3 spot and a very, very solid #4. On top of that, you've got one of the best players in the AHL knocking on the door and Lazar who is a total wildcard.

There is middle ground between it being a position of strength and one of weakness. Both are just as wrong. We've got solid pieces and good potential down the lineup. It's definitely far from weak.

We have two good centers and then a lot of hope. Monahan is average defensively and we have two other below average defensive centers.

So again, one good defensive Center and then a lot of hope. Monahan might turn into a good defensive Center but right now he's average defensively at best. Bennett is bad defensively and Jankowski has great potential but that's all it is right now.

It is weak. Very weak. Good centers are good defensively, we have one of those. Tell me again how it isn't weak? Potential is potential and until they pan out its still weak.

[Crumpy-Gunt]

Trading Backlund would be a huge mistake. If you want to deal from a position of strength then you move a d man or prospect. Maybe a future 1st round pick. You don't trade arguably your best all round center and bank on Monahan Bennett Jankowski if you don't have to. I've got a lot of faith in those 3 but unless and until they all take huge steps we still need Backlund.

I am all for this team getting a proven number 1 goalie, signing Stone and extending Backlund, trying to offload Brouwer and finding some goal scoring wingers via draft, free agency and/or trade. I think we have a great core and very promising group of prospects. No need to panic. Backlund was the mvp of our season and could easily have an A on his jersey. He loves this team and city. You don't trade guys like him

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

...It is weak. Very weak. Good centers are good defensively, we have one of those. Tell me again how it isn't weak? Potential is potential and until they pan out its still weak.

It is only "very weak" if you can show that most NHL teams boast a stronger core of players down the middle, and you cannot. You also seem to be happy to ignore the fact that while Monahan is not great defensively, he is already one of the top scoring centres in the WC at the tender age of 22—it remains a good bet that he will continue to improve. So, yes, I would agree that while the Flames centre depth is not "great," it absolutely is not "very weak." At minimum it is presently above average with good potential to be excellent in a couple of years.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

It is only "very weak" if you can show that most NHL teams boast a stronger core of players down the middle, and you cannot. You also seem to be happy to ignore the fact that while Monahan is not great defensively, he is already one of the top scoring centres in the WC at the tender age of 22. So, yes, I would agree that the Flames centre depth is not "great," it absolutely is not "very weak." At minimum it is presently above average with good potential to be excellent in a couple of years.

How am I ignoring Monahan is a good player? He is a great scorer, nobody is ever going to deny that. But he's not above average defensively.

If we are talking league wide Flames are average at the Center position at the very best. how can you say they're above average? Monahan and Backlund are all we have and one of them is average defensively which is really important for a Center. Most teams have at least two guys who are good defensively at the Center position. Flames need another good defensive Center on the third line. Hopefully it's Jankowski. But until they get one they are average at best and IMO a weak spot on the team.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

We have two good centers and then a lot of hope. Monahan is average defensively and we have two other below average defensive centers.

So again, one good defensive Center and then a lot of hope. Monahan might turn into a good defensive Center but right now he's average defensively at best. Bennett is bad defensively and Jankowski has great potential but that's all it is right now.

It is weak. Very weak. Good centers are good defensively, we have one of those. Tell me again how it isn't weak? Potential is potential and until they pan out its still weak.

Disagreeing with an overwhelmingly positive bias doesn't excuse a negative one. Calgary's center depth is average, you can argue it being slightly above or slightly below, but that's about it.

To argue it's "very weak" you'd have to show 20-25 teams who have better depth. I suspect you can't.

You've also forgotten Stajan, who is good defensively and a very solid 4th liner. Monahan is a very good offensive center, and Backlund is one of the best defensive centers.

Even without Bennett or Janko, that's no worse than average.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

How am I ignoring Monahan is a good player? He is a great scorer, nobody is ever going to deny that. But he's not above average defensively.

If we are talking league wide Flames are average at the Center position at the very best. how can you say they're above average?

Because I do not believe there are more than 10–12 NHL teams that boast an obviously better balance at the centre position. The fact that you seem to agree that they are presently "average at best" at the position suggests to me that even you must concede they are not "very weak" down the middle as you previously claimed. It's hyperbole.

And more to the point, Backlund is NOT merely average defensively. He is one of the best defensive centres in the world. I maintain that you re fixating on defensive ability as the pure measure for what constitutes centre depth, and that is only part of the equation.

[GoJetsGo]

You guys seem to be forgetting. Things are either the best ever... or the worst ever. No such thing as middle ground.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Because I do not believe there are more than 10–12 NHL teams that boast an obviously better balance at the centre position. The fact that you seem to agree that they are presently "average at best" at the position suggests to me that even you must concede they are not "very weak" down the middle as you previously claimed. It's hyperbole.

And more to the point, Backlund is NOT merely average defensively. He is one of the best defensive centres in the world. I maintain that you re fixating on defensive ability as the pure measure for what constitutes centre depth, and that is only part of the equation.

Who said Backlund was average defensively? Quit putting words in my mouth. He's great defensively as I've previously said numerous times.

Your opinion isn't right just because you speak in absolutes as well. You are the king of hyperbole.