[PGT] All hail Lord Zebulon! Flames win it 2-1

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

That's the juggling act for a GM. The NFL model used by successful teams is that once aging players start to decline a team will move on regardless of him being a fan favorite, locker room intangibles, etc. NHL GM's aren't afforded the ability to just cut players with guaranteed contracts so a GM has a lot of variables to consider. Do you try to move him while he's still a useful player and weaken your team in the short term to avoid the long term pains? The GM job is much more difficult than most fans think it is. You see players like Lucic, Glencross, Frolik, Neal, Brouwer, etc decline quickly as they age and a GM can't afford to have too many of these guys associated with their roster while trying to build a contender. In regards to Backlund I do agree with what FDW said earlier in this thread in that he will assume the role Stajan did which is fine but the reality is that the team had a hole in it's top 6 with Backlund and with his drift to bottom 6 it's now created two holes in the top 6.

Those players were mostly physical, or relied on hard work and less on brain power IMO. I see Backlund as more of a Gio type - they work hard but also try to play a smart game. Those guys last longer.

As for Stajan comparisons, maybe there will be a corresponding decline, but Backlund is starting from a much higher position. Stajan never had the production Backlund did, except for one year in Toronto. So where Stajan moved from a 3rd line quality centre to a 4th liner, Backlund moves form a 2nd line quality to 3rd line (and is probably better at that than Stajan was at his peak).

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

That's the juggling act for a GM. The NFL model used by successful teams is that once aging players start to decline a team will move on regardless of him being a fan favorite, locker room intangibles, etc. NHL GM's aren't afforded the ability to just cut players with guaranteed contracts so a GM has a lot of variables to consider. Do you try to move him while he's still a useful player and weaken your team in the short term to avoid the long term pains? The GM job is much more difficult than most fans think it is. You see players like Lucic, Glencross, Frolik, Neal, Brouwer, etc decline quickly as they age and a GM can't afford to have too many of these guys associated with their roster while trying to build a contender. In regards to Backlund I do agree with what FDW said earlier in this thread in that he will assume the role Stajan did which is fine but the reality is that the team had a hole in it's top 6 with Backlund and with his drift to bottom 6 it's now created two holes in the top 6.

Right but you're kind of pushing him to the grave hastily.

He's having an off year, but as I said above he's not when it comes to assists and chance generation. Just goals. That doesn't say alarming decline to me.

Even at his current pace he's heading for a 36 point season. Last year 36 points was the 162nd ranked forward, or guy number 5.2 across 31 teams.

You're push into a bottom six role is very premature.

[Flash Walken]

I love tkachuk and Lindholm so much.

One of them low-key wrecks a guy every game, and when one of them is really feeling it you can tell the other guy Feed's off it so much.

They are such a deadly combination. Everything you want Monahan and Gaudreau to be and more.

I don't think that lucic is the right linemate there for any extended time, but hoooooo boy if they could get a Brandon Saad or Chris Kunitz style linemate, look out.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Right but you're kind of pushing him to the grave hastily.

He's having an off year, but as I said above he's not when it comes to assists and chance generation. Just goals. That doesn't say alarming decline to me.

Even at his current pace he's heading for a 36 point season. Last year 36 points was the 162nd ranked forward, or guy number 5.2 across 31 teams.

You're push into a bottom six role is very premature.

Where does 36 points rank in the top 10 teams?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Where does 36 points rank in the top 10 teams?

Way way down the list on TB, Sharks, Leafs and Caps (something like 8-9th), 5th place on the Preds, and I think 6th place on the Blues, Isles, Bruins, Pens, Jets.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Where does 36 points rank in the top 10 teams?

What does it matter?

If you're going to call a guy a bottom six player then the league average cutoff between forwards 6 and 7 is the key.

If you want to say the Flames need to have better than average second liners that's a good argument, but doesn't really change the fact that the label has to be applied on the league average.

But your answer anyway?

4th ... exactly in line with the league average.

[TheIronMaiden]

It doesn't feel like the Flames are on a three game win streak. I am happy that they are finding ways to win games, but their lack of scoring is starting to be concerning. Overall they seem like a resilient squad. Talbot played lights out, Lucic - Lindholm - Tkachuk were a rough and tumble line. The blame for that game being as close as it was at the end falls on the power play, it needs passes with urgency again.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

It doesn't feel like the Flames are on a three game win streak. I am happy that they are finding ways to win games, but their lack of scoring is starting to be concerning. Overall they seem like a resilient squad. Talbot played lights out, Lucic - Lindholm - Tkachuk were a rough and tumble line. The blame for that game being as close as it was at the end falls on the power play, it needs passes with urgency again.

I agree, but a big part of why the Flames were limited to just two goals last night was Cory Crawford. He played an awesome game, and was possibly better than Talbot, who also had a really impressive performance.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I agree, but a big part of why the Flames were limited to just two goals last night was Cory Crawford. He played an awesome game, and was possibly better than Talbot, who also had a really impressive performance.

This is a good point. Credit where credit is due Crawford made some big saves.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

This is a good point. Credit where credit is due Crawford made some big saves.

Plus even including last night's 2 goal night, the team has put up 3.2/GP in their last 5 games. That's right up there for 5 game segments this year.

The offence is coming ... David Rittich first periods probably cost this team a pretty solid run since Xmas.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

It doesn't feel like the Flames are on a three game win streak. I am happy that they are finding ways to win games, but their lack of scoring is starting to be concerning. Overall they seem like a resilient squad. Talbot played lights out, Lucic - Lindholm - Tkachuk were a rough and tumble line. The blame for that game being as close as it was at the end falls on the power play, it needs passes with urgency again.

10 goals in 3 games or a 3.33 gf isn't really a lack of scoring, they were a bit unfortunate last night. Crawford was terrific and made some real 4 and 5 bell saves. Credit to a guy that's willing to stand in there bare handed.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Bingo

What does it matter?

If you're going to call a guy a bottom six player then the league average cutoff between forwards 6 and 7 is the key.

If you want to say the Flames need to have better than average second liners that's a good argument, but doesn't really change the fact that the label has to be applied on the league average.

But your answer anyway?

4th ... exactly in line with the league average.

Top 10 teams last year, 36 points would rank:

9th on Tampa
7th on Calgary
6th on Boston
8th on Washington
6th on NYI
9th on San Jose
5th on Nashville (6th had they not traded away fiala)
6th on Pittsburgh (by a single point)
9th on Toronto
7th on St. Louis
7th on Winnipeg

[Samonadreau]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

That's the juggling act for a GM. The NFL model used by successful teams is that once aging players start to decline a team will move on regardless of him being a fan favorite, locker room intangibles, etc. NHL GM's aren't afforded the ability to just cut players with guaranteed contracts so a GM has a lot of variables to consider. Do you try to move him while he's still a useful player and weaken your team in the short term to avoid the long term pains? The GM job is much more difficult than most fans think it is. You see players like Lucic, Glencross, Frolik, Neal, Brouwer, etc decline quickly as they age and a GM can't afford to have too many of these guys associated with their roster while trying to build a contender. In regards to Backlund I do agree with what FDW said earlier in this thread in that he will assume the role Stajan did which is fine but the reality is that the team had a hole in it's top 6 with Backlund and with his drift to bottom 6 it's now created two holes in the top 6.

Thing is you can probably get by with slotting one 3rd liner in the top 6, but not 2. So when we needed one it was a nice to have, now that we need two its pretty much a need at this point, we need another legit top6, preferably RS Forward.

This is all if you want to slot Backlund as 3C, which is where he should be to have this team at its most competitive.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Top 10 teams last year, 36 points would rank:

9th on Tampa
7th on Calgary
6th on Boston
8th on Washington
6th on NYI
9th on San Jose
5th on Nashville (6th had they not traded away fiala)
6th on Pittsburgh (by a single point)
9th on Toronto
7th on St. Louis
7th on Winnipeg

I must have done five on five points only ... I'll check

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

That's the juggling act for a GM. The NFL model used by successful teams is that once aging players start to decline a team will move on regardless of him being a fan favorite, locker room intangibles, etc. NHL GM's aren't afforded the ability to just cut players with guaranteed contracts so a GM has a lot of variables to consider. Do you try to move him while he's still a useful player and weaken your team in the short term to avoid the long term pains? The GM job is much more difficult than most fans think it is. You see players like Lucic, Glencross, Frolik, Neal, Brouwer, etc decline quickly as they age and a GM can't afford to have too many of these guys associated with their roster while trying to build a contender. In regards to Backlund I do agree with what FDW said earlier in this thread in that he will assume the role Stajan did which is fine but the reality is that the team had a hole in it's top 6 with Backlund and with his drift to bottom 6 it's now created two holes in the top 6.

The flip side of that is that in the NFL model players drafted, pretty much whatever round, will be impactful players. That is not the same in the NHL.
You can easily sell high on a player in the NFL and get that 1st rounder late in the first or early second and you know they will play role for your team. You have to draft top 5 in most cases to almost guarantee a replacement player can step in. Those types of trade typically only happen by accident (ala Colorado when they traded Duchene to Ottawa).

[Bingo]

New answer ...

36 points would be player 7 on the top five teams, player 8 on the 6-10 teams, player 7 on teams 11-15. Player 6 on 16-20, player 5 on 21-25 and player 4 on the bottom six teams.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Top 10 teams last year, 36 points would rank:

9th on Tampa
7th on Calgary
6th on Boston
8th on Washington
6th on NYI
9th on San Jose
5th on Nashville (6th had they not traded away fiala)
6th on Pittsburgh (by a single point)
9th on Toronto
7th on St. Louis
7th on Winnipeg

So, still a comfortably above average top-six forward by production according to definition, and good enough to play in the SCF. Factor in everything else Backlund does away from the puck and I think even with 36-points he acquits himself very well to be included in the top-six on a top-ten roster.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Bingo

New answer ...

36 points would be player 7 on the top five teams, player 8 on the 6-10 teams, player 7 on teams 11-15. Player 6 on 16-20, player 5 on 21-25 and player 4 on the bottom six teams.

So 36 points is a bottom 6 player on a playoff roster.

So then maybe EE isn't being premature with his push for backlund to a bottom 6 role?

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

10 goals in 3 games or a 3.33 gf isn't really a lack of scoring, they were a bit unfortunate last night. Crawford was terrific and made some real 4 and 5 bell saves. Credit to a guy that's willing to stand in there bare handed.

Here is their record since their 7 game win streak. Also note that the the shoot out win goal does not count.

Sat, December 14 Carolina Hurricanes L 4–0
Tue, December 17 Pittsburgh Penguins L 4–1
Thu, December 19 Montreal Canadiens L 4–3F/OT
Sun, December 22 @ Dallas Stars W 5–1
Mon, December 23 @ Minnesota Wild L 3–0
Fri, December 27 @ Edmonton Oilers W 5–1
Sun, December 29 Vancouver Canucks L 5–2
Tue, December 31 Chicago Blackhawks L 5–3
Thu, January 2 New York Rangers W 4–3
Sun, January 5 @ Minnesota Wild W 5–4F/SO
Tue, January 7 @ Chicago Blackhawks W 2–1


In those 11 games they have only scored 29 times. Their average in that recent stretch is 2.63 goals per game. That is actually worse then their season average which is 2.7 and is ranked 23rd in the NHL.

Admittedly this is pretty arbitrary, and since the Christmas break, after those 6 games,they are in fact on that 3.33 goals per game average. Which is good. Nevertheless, its difficult to deny that over a 45 game sample size, the Flames have struggled to produce.

I think that my concern is that there is a consistency issue. It's either that the Flames play lights out and score 4 goals, or they struggle to pot 2.

[AC]

How has Backlund projected since being moved to the wing? Feels like a lot better offensively.

Edit: Looks like he had 10 points in 29 games before the shakeup, and 10 points in 16 games since. A 51 point pace since the roster shakeup where he's largely played wing I think?

Small sample size, but significantly better production for sure.