[Rumour] Lucic expected to be asked to waive NMC for expansion draft

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

If your suggesting he could go to Vancouver and play he said he never wants to be back there. This was years ago after he was partying there and another person picked a fight with him . Specifically a canuck fan when he was still with boston. It wasn't even the first time he's had issues in Vancouver. This was actually a big reason he chose to go to Edmonton over Vancouver . He's even stated it would be a dream to play for the Canucks but he's been attacked many times in Vancouver.

I wasn’t suggesting he play in Van, I had read that before.

I understood he may want to be close due to family, and thought getting to Van may be just as quick from Calgary as Seattle. That’s all

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I think it's a safe bet that he waives, but I am not understanding all this talk of him going to Seattle. There is NO chance that he is claimed, unless he is the only body that we have to expose.

I don’t think there’s a chance he gets claimed. What I said was, if he thought about it and the impossible happened, it’s not a bad outcome for him.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I don’t think there’s a chance he gets claimed. What I said was, if he thought about it and the impossible happened, it’s not a bad outcome for him.

Yeah, I see this as a situation with no downside for him: he waives and either does not get claimed—thus ingratiating himself further to the fanbase, or he gets claimed and has the chance to retire closer to home.

I can see Lucic finding both outcomes attractive.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Yeah, I see this as a situation with no downside for him: he waives and either does not get claimed—thus ingratiating himself further to the fanbase, or he gets claimed and has the chance to retire closer to home.

I can see Lucic finding both outcomes attractive.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

That is how he SHOULD look at it, but that is easy for us to say.

[btimbit]

Honestly, not a big deal if he doesn't waive anyway. It's definitely preferable, but if he doesn't waive just means we expose Backlund instead. I love Backs, have his jersey, but losing a 5.3M third liner isn't really the end of the world.

Seattle likely takes whoever isn't protected between Gio/Tanev/Hanifin anyway, if I was a betting man.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Honestly, not a big deal if he doesn't waive anyway. It's definitely preferable, but if he doesn't waive just means we expose Backlund instead. I love Backs, have his jersey, but losing a 5.3M third liner isn't really the end of the world.

Seattle likely takes whoever isn't protected between Gio/Tanev/Hanifin anyway, if I was a betting man.

Mikael Backlund is not a third liner. If he is left unprotected he will likely be one of the best available forwards in the entire draft, and Seattle is almost certain to select him. The Flames will miss Backlund a lot if they are faced with losing him.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Mikael Backlund is not a third liner. If he is left unprotected he will likely be one of the best available forwards in the entire draft, and Seattle is almost certain to select him. The Flames will miss Backlund a lot if they are faced with losing him.

No, for one half of the year he is not a 3rd liner, he is a 4th liner. Then the other half he is a 1st liner. The last two post seasons he has not been great either. At his current contract I have doubts Seattle would claim him but if they did I would be more than ok with dumping that contract. That cap space is more valuable to this team than what an inconsistent Backlund brings imo.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I still disagree and still feel that Backlund is criminally underrated. Everyone talks about Bergeron as being this defensive god (and in many ways he is), but I wonder how he would do given Backlund's utilization? Undoubtedly worse. How worse? Maybe he wouldn't put up as many points as Backlund even.


Backlund should have won a Selke by now. He gets absolutely buried (not sure about this season with Lindholm as a full-time centre now), but like a zombie, you can not keep him in that grave. Being buried in zone starts and quality of comp allows everyone else to produce more. It allows the Flames to also shelter the other lines a bit more and stop the 'bleeding' at times.



I think Backlund is an easy fill on the protection slot, without even thinking about it. His role is extremely demanding, and he does it every single year without complaint. Never complains about his usage, or linemates, never has anything coming from him other than a willingness to just do whatever it takes to accomplish what is asked of him. Heck, give me another 2 or 3 Backlunds, and this team wins a couple of cups.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

No, for one half of the year he is not a 3rd liner, he is a 4th liner. Then the other half he is a 1st liner. The last two post seasons he has not been great either. At his current contract I have doubts Seattle would claim him but if they did I would be more than ok with dumping that contract. That cap space is more valuable to this team than what an inconsistent Backlund brings imo.

I am sorry, but this is nonsense.

At his absolute worst, Backlund is still MUCH better than a fourth-line player, and at his best he has looked for extended periods like a top-line centre. He has not been playing well to start the year, and yet he has still easily been among the Flames top-nine. Moreover, his last playoff appearance was actually much better than you seem to remember: Backlund tied Sam Bennett as the highest scoring EVS forward on the team—the same Bennett whom a few posters on this site have called "electric" as a result.

He is under contract for three years, and is a lock for +45 points in a season with heavy defensive zone starts. Seattle will not be anywhere near the cap for a few seasons, so I would imagine his salary won't be much of a concern to them, and he could probably be moved for quality assets at a future TD.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

I still disagree and still feel that Backlund is criminally underrated. Everyone talks about Bergeron as being this defensive god (and in many ways he is), but I wonder how he would do given Backlund's utilization? Undoubtedly worse. How worse? Maybe he wouldn't put up as many points as Backlund even.


Backlund should have won a Selke by now. He gets absolutely buried (not sure about this season with Lindholm as a full-time centre now), but like a zombie, you can not keep him in that grave. Being buried in zone starts and quality of comp allows everyone else to produce more. It allows the Flames to also shelter the other lines a bit more and stop the 'bleeding' at times.



I think Backlund is an easy fill on the protection slot, without even thinking about it. His role is extremely demanding, and he does it every single year without complaint. Never complains about his usage, or linemates, never has anything coming from him other than a willingness to just do whatever it takes to accomplish what is asked of him. Heck, give me another 2 or 3 Backlunds, and this team wins a couple of cups.

Good Backlund is a Selke candidate. And vastly under-rated.

But bad Backlund is a soft player that can be completely ineffective.

I like Backlund, but I think the variance in his level of play is too great. He needs to be mentally tougher. And harder to play against (all the time).

[GioforPM]

Backlund seems to me to be a guy who needs minutes, and a specific task (eg shutting down the top line), to be really effective. His bump down to 3rd line cuts into both of those, so there’s a dilemma in my mind.

[SeanCharles]

Backlund is not a 4th liner, he is an above average 2-way center that should slot into any teams middle 6.

Backlund has always been one of my favourites as I knew he would develop into a 2nd/3rd line center back when he was a prospect. Just had a feeling about him. Having said that he is getting older and I think Lindholm is a superior player, both offensively and defensively so he isn’t required to be leaned on as much as in past years.

I feel like he is a player who we could consider offloading, especially if it could somehow net us a top 6 RWer.

I don’t see it happening as the organization will likely keep him and Gio around for as long as they want to be here but I don’t think it’s crazy to talk about maximizing his value in a trade, especially before the expansion draft.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Honestly, not a big deal if he doesn't waive anyway. It's definitely preferable, but if he doesn't waive just means we expose Backlund instead. I love Backs, have his jersey, but losing a 5.3M third liner isn't really the end of the world.

Seattle likely takes whoever isn't protected between Gio/Tanev/Hanifin anyway, if I was a betting man.

Hanifin! I can assure you he will be protected

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Mikael Backlund is not a third liner. If he is left unprotected he will likely be one of the best available forwards in the entire draft, and Seattle is almost certain to select him. The Flames will miss Backlund a lot if they are faced with losing him.

He’s 2C defensively at least. That said, he’s playing third line here. So the question is whether the Flames are better off playing a guy making his salary (who has earned it) to play on the third line. They need to see how Lindholm at C plays out.

[SeanCharles]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Hanifin! I can assure you he will be protected

I think we can all agree on 6 forwards, 2 dmen and 1 goalie that will be protected.

It’s the last two spots we debate, so yea I don’t know why Hanifin was mentioned as a possibility to be exposed..?

Crazy talk.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Honestly, not a big deal if he doesn't waive anyway. It's definitely preferable, but if he doesn't waive just means we expose Backlund instead. I love Backs, have his jersey, but losing a 5.3M third liner isn't really the end of the world.

Seattle likely takes whoever isn't protected between Gio/Tanev/Hanifin anyway, if I was a betting man.

Really? Assuming Bennett isn't moved for picks and prospects, I can't see them taking Gio over Bennett. At this point, you most likely protect Tanev, and expose Gio.

[Enoch Root]

Since the thread has now fully morphed into an expansion draft discussion, I am curious where people sit on the following:

expose Gio, then offer a 1st to get him back, with some retention (let's say 50% for discussion)

who says no?

[DJones]

Honestly I never really was worried about his. There's really no reason for him not to waive.

Not like they'll take him or we can trade him. Handshake deal with management not to dump him to Arizona or something.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Since the thread has now fully morphed into an expansion draft discussion, I am curious where people sit on the following:

expose Gio, then offer a 1st to get him back, with some retention (let's say 50% for discussion)

who says no?

So give up a first to save 50% on the single year left? When there’s no other D you need to save from being claimed? I don’t see a big benefit. I’d rather buy him out (and potentially re-sign at $1M).

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

So give up a first to save 50% on the single year left? When there’s no other D you need to save from being claimed? I don’t see a big benefit. I’d rather buy him out (and potentially re-sign at $1M).

don't we have to expose 2 skaters though?

I might be wrong here, but if we don't expose Gio (or one of the 4, and it won't be any of the other 3), wouldn't we have to sign someone else to expose?