Francis: Backlund contract talks heating up. Ask is around $5 mil x 5 or 6 years

[Erick Estrada]

Problem is that too many people think last season's Backlund represents the player. That was his career season. He's never going to have a season like that again. This season's Backlund and the seasons before is what the Flames will be getting with the extension. It's going to be diminishing returns from here on in as he's not an overly skilled player and players like this usually drop off offensively big time in their 30's.

[Poe969]

If he signs and the team expects him to be their second line center they're going to be let down a lot. Some on here still think he's a legit #2 guy but I honestly don't see it, I still see him as more of a defense first guy who had a great year and put up 50 points but likely won't do that well again.

It's funny that people always criticize contracts given to UFA's after having a career year yet last year was Backlund's career year and this year he's not nearly as good and people want to give him a contract that assumes he'll do what he did last year every year. If he would have got a 5 or 6 mil contract last year and played like this this year, he'd be one of the top whipping boys on the team.

I know he's a great human and he does lots of charity work and is really nice but that doesn't matter to me, I like all the stuff he does but I want the team to win first. I would like to keep him on the team but as nothing more than a third line/PK guy who occasionally puts up points. If he really wants to be here then he'll take a pay cut to do so, I still think a 5x5 is a bit high but it wouldn't be too bad, anything more then that on dollars or term and I think it's a bad contract.

[Huntingwhale]

Originally Posted by Beninho

He’s been un-engaged a lot defensively, especially compared to last season. The 3M line has now become the 1M line. Backlund has been one of my biggest let downs of the season. Coming off last season I had very high hopes for Backlund, there were times last season where he looked like our no.1 center. This year he’s had stone hands and his finishing has been atrocious. He gets stuck constantly trying to cycle the puck and rarely gets into the slot. Not been a fan of his game at all

I love Backlund and all, but this is precisely why I have zero issue with any GM who tries to lowball any upcoming free agent player, especially an upcoming UFA. More often than not, these players never live up to their contract and it ends up becoming a burden. I'm not saying Backlund will suddenly become lazy and become a Brouwer. But IMO Backlund's peak season was last season. It's a risk to sign him longterm at a high cap hit.

[Roof-Daddy]

I don't disagree with much of what's being said here about Backlund. Problem is, if you don't want to commit the rumored money and term to him, then you have to find an adequate replacement or else you leave a big important hole in the line up and end up wasting the next two seasons of this core.

That replacement isn't going to come internally, at least not right away (IMO Janko isn't ready to take Backlunds spot) and if you find it externally it's going to cost a lot of assets to attain via trade or at least 5 x $5 million on the UFA market, neither of which are guaranteed anyways.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

I don't disagree with much of what's being said here about Backlund. Problem is, if you don't want to commit the rumored money and term to him, then you have to find an adequate replacement or else you leave a big important hole in the line up and end up wasting the next two seasons of this core.

That replacement isn't going to come internally, at least not right away (IMO Janko isn't ready to take Backlunds spot) and if you find it externally it's going to cost a lot of assets to attain via trade or at least 5 x $5 million on the UFA market, neither of which are guaranteed anyways.

You have Stajan going to be gone this summer so losing Backlund means that there's two vacant center positions which is a tall task to address in one offseason. Bennett not panning out at center has complicated things. At the end of the day I think they have to try and get him signed but be mindful of what they are paying for.

[GreenLantern2814]

I say any plan that has Sam Bennett at centre is no plan at all.

[jonkaupp]

Originally Posted by Poe969

If he signs and the team expects him to be their second line center they're going to be let down a lot. Some on here still think he's a legit #2 guy but I honestly don't see it, I still see him as more of a defense first guy who had a great year and put up 50 points but likely won't do that well again.

It's funny that people always criticize contracts given to UFA's after having a career year yet last year was Backlund's career year and this year he's not nearly as good and people want to give him a contract that assumes he'll do what he did last year every year. If he would have got a 5 or 6 mil contract last year and played like this this year, he'd be one of the top whipping boys on the team.

I know he's a great human and he does lots of charity work and is really nice but that doesn't matter to me, I like all the stuff he does but I want the team to win first. I would like to keep him on the team but as nothing more than a third line/PK guy who occasionally puts up points. If he really wants to be here then he'll take a pay cut to do so, I still think a 5x5 is a bit high but it wouldn't be too bad, anything more then that on dollars or term and I think it's a bad contract.

He is literally on pace for 51 points right now. And his fancy stats are still very good. Every post on this page is completely anecdotal and totally lost.

[jonkaupp]

Originally Posted by Beninho

After his recent play I would be highly concerned with giving him 5 mill for 6 years when this team desperately needs guys to fill the net. Backlunds defensive play has not been great either, he’s been very much carried by Tkachuk offensively.

Well that’s just not true but sure, go ahead and keep posting the trash

[jonkaupp]

I guess since I post on multiple sports teams boards I should be used to it but my god the lazy analysis is maddening. You can literally read this thread and see the 7 game win streak end, followed by a crummy extra time streak and then the loss to the knights. ‘Ooh we definitely gotta sign that’ to ‘hmmm maybe Backlund isn’t as good as we thought ‘ to ‘he’s regressed and not good defensively or offensively anymore. I’m not gonna back up anything I’m saying with anything factual, he’s not good’

My god it’s silly as hell.

[Beninho]

Originally Posted by jonkaupp

Well that’s just not true but sure, go ahead and keep posting the trash

Backlund may be on pace for 51 pts but his goal scoring is down while playing with probably the most skilled players he’s played on a line with in Tkachuk. He’s also a -7 (not the greatest stat but still says a lot) and has been outplayed this year by his opposing matchup way more than last year. His offensive game is always a bit streaky but his defensive game has been my biggest worry. He was a selke candidate last year and he’s no where’s near that now. If last year was an aberration then Treliving needs to be very careful with this contract.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

I say any plan that has Sam Bennett at centre is no plan at all.

Ridiculous

Did you have a plan in 2011 for Backlund and his 46 career points as a center?

Bennett was a top center in junior, he's big, he's strong, he's fierce and has all the talent and tools in the world to become a very good center. To say any 21 year old is finished at their normal position is silly.

Instead of totally blaming the player how about throw some frustration at the moron coaching staff that stifled his progress by playing him with scrubs that couldn't score on a soccer net

[jonkaupp]

Originally Posted by Beninho

Backlund may be on pace for 51 pts but his goal scoring is down while playing with probably the most skilled players he’s played on a line with in Tkachuk. He’s also a -7 (not the greatest stat but still says a lot) and has been outplayed this year by his opposing matchup way more than last year. His offensive game is always a bit streaky but his defensive game has been my biggest worry. He was a selke candidate last year and he’s no where’s near that now. If last year was an aberration then Treliving needs to be very careful with this contract.

No, it’s not just ‘not the greatest stat’ it’s actually a completely useless stat and says absolutely nothing at all. His defensive game has been excellent by any measure that actually matters. You are plainly wrong, period.

And I love when people point to a players ‘goal scoring’ being down when being called on their silly hypocrisy about offensive production being down. Points are points. I guess Gaudreau isn’t as good as a lot of the players with less points than him that are scoring more goals. Hell, now that I think of it there was a thread earlier this year about Johnny’s offensive game being down while he was like 3rd in the league in scoring. Guess this kinda non sense should be expected.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by jonkaupp

No, it’s not just ‘not the greatest stat’ it’s actually a completely useless stat and says absolutely nothing at all. His defensive game has been excellent by any measure that actually matters. You are plainly wrong, period.

And I love when people point to a players ‘goal scoring’ being down when being called on their silly hypocrisy about offensive production being down. Points are points. I guess Gaudreau isn’t as good as a lot of the players with less points than him that are scoring more goals. Hell, now that I think of it there was a thread earlier this year about Johnny’s offensive game being down while he was like 3rd in the league in scoring. Guess this kinda non sense should be expected.

Tell me you did not just claim +/- is a garbage stat while laying your defense of that statement with “fancy stats” as a basis? +/- is a pretty concrete stat, open to little interpretation. You were either on the ice for a goal scored for or against, or you were not. It is an absolute measure not open to interpretation. Conversely, many of those fancy stats are based on unrelated events, events that are extremely subjective and inconsistent in collection method. All it takes is one group of off ice officials to incorrectly report data - hello Edmonton and Boston - and the data becomes useless. The fact that they link two unrelated events is problematic enough, but the impurity of the data brings the validity of any findings into serious question.

I get why people don’t like +/-. At times it is unfair because a guy gets dinged during a line change. But it is very useful in looking at a team and discovering who is consistently on the ice for more goals against on a consistent basis. It is the batting strikeouts stat of hockey.

[jonkaupp]

Originally Posted by New Era

Tell me you did not just claim +/- is a garbage stat while laying your defense of that statement with “fancy stats” as a basis? +/- is a pretty concrete stat, open to little interpretation. You were either on the ice for a goal scored for or against, or you were not. It is an absolute measure not open to interpretation. Conversely, many of those fancy stats are based on unrelated events, events that are extremely subjective and inconsistent in collection method. All it takes is one group of off ice officials to incorrectly report data - hello Edmonton and Boston - and the data becomes useless. The fact that they link two unrelated events is problematic enough, but the impurity of the data brings the validity of any findings into serious question.

I get why people don’t like +/-. At times it is unfair because a guy gets dinged during a line change. But it is very useful in looking at a team and discovering who is consistently on the ice for more goals against on a consistent basis. It is the batting strikeouts stat of hockey.

Yes, Plus Minus is a totally useless stat. I didn’t at all say it was open to interpretation, I said it was garbage and useless. Because it is useless and should never be used as evidence of how player has been playing defensively. It is also 100% not the ‘batting strikeouts stat of hockey’, that is a laughably absurd point of view.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by jonkaupp

Yes, Plus Minus is a totally useless stat. I didn’t at all say it was open to interpretation, I said it was garbage and useless. Because it is useless and should never be used as evidence of how player has been playing defensively. It is also 100% not the ‘batting strikeouts stat of hockey’, that is a laughably absurd point of view.

Well, you certainly did make a case for why the stat is useless and why fancy stats are relevant. “Because I say so” is always a sure way to convince anyone of the correctness of your position. Well done.

[jonkaupp]

Originally Posted by New Era

Well, you certainly did make a case for why the stat is useless and why fancy stats are relevant. “Because I say so” is always a sure way to convince anyone of the correctness of your position. Well done.

I guess I don’t feel it’s necessary to make a case as to why plus minus is useless because it has seemingly been a closed case for years now. I mean you can go ahead and hit that google bar and find a hundred articles detailing why it is useless. Our own Brian Burke has called plus/minus horse####. It’s even been found that the NHL miscounted the stat on a regular basis, which is your whole argument for why corsi isn’t reliable.

[Poe969]

+/- isn't a concrete stat but it's a bit of a guideline. It's more to help gauge something and it's pretty easy to understand. Tell me more about thes "fancy stats" that say how good Backlund is.

[metroneck]

I have always been in the ‘keep him’ camp, but this team needs a shake up, and picks in the upcoming draft.

I think for where this team is in its’ development to be a contender, it’s time to view him as an exchangeable asset.

When you look back at great teams, they typically made that tough, high risk trade somewhere along the way. I’d think moving him would be classify.

[Poe969]

The only way they can move him is if they have a backup plan in place...and probably a backup for the backup. Unless he wants too big of a contract. I agree with those that say it would create a hole in the lineup, the team would need someone to step up and there aren't a lot of candidates ready for a top 9 spot.

I'm all for keeping him if his contract demands are reasonable. I'm all for trading him if they have a plan for someone else to fill that spot. I'm also all for trading him if someone made an offer the Flames couldn't refuse but it would have to be massive and lets face it, I don't think there are a ton of teams lining up to overpay for Backlund.

I just really hate that the main reason to keep Backlund is because there aren't any other options. In a dream scenario I don't think he's on the team (and this is not realistic at all...) Tavares as the first line, Monahan as the second line and Janko on the third with a prospect or affordable UFA on the fourth. If the team can somehow get a second "high end" center it would force Backlund off the team...unless the team trades for a high end center and uses Janko in the trade and Backlund signs for a very reasonable deal to be on the third.

I'd like to have Backlund on the team if everything lined up properly but I agree that he's a guy who the team could move on from if the right player came along.

[jonkaupp]

Originally Posted by Poe969

+/- isn't a concrete stat but it's a bit of a guideline. It's more to help gauge something and it's pretty easy to understand. Tell me more about thes "fancy stats" that say how good Backlund is.

Even strength 55.6% corsi with 42.7% off zone starts. Very good by almost any measurement. Last year he finished with 55% corsi on only 36.3% off zone starts, which is very very good. Both are good numbers regardless. Relative corsi is lower than last year, primarily because the team as a whole has better possession metrics. His shooting percentage is down 3.4% which we should at least see return a bit to the mean before the end of the season. On ice shooting percentage (the team as a wholes shooting percentage when he’s on the ice) is down 2.2% from last year which has probably contributed to at least 10 goals which explains the (still useless) poorer plus minus number.