[Rumour] Backlund leaning towards not re-signing with Flames

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

I don't think this comes back to Sutter. It comes back to a lack of leadership in the room. It also shows me that none of the previous core(Backlund, Lindholm, Andersson, Tanev, Mangiapane) are fit to captain this team in a way that would push players and keep them accountable.

In fact I doubt there's anyone fit to be captain right now. If we must have one then the best bet is if one of Huberdeau, Kadri, and Weegar. Hopefully, they are more comfortable and have a bigger voice in the room now that they've been here for a year.

Leadership decides on which goaltender to start? Or puts out one of the worst powerplays in the league?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

Team was bad
Sutter came and fixed it
Team was bad again

I doubt Sutter is the only problem

Yeah, it seems pretty obvious that there was a problem in the room. I don't think Sutter was helping or that he was going to be the solution. Sutter's whole style pretty much demands that there is a strong bond in the room so that the players come together.

There was just too much major change in a short period of time. Just think about the dynamic in your own work places and what would happen if 2 or 3 popular leaders left and were replaced with guys that didn't have as much invested in the work place, got paid more (or were about to get paid more) than everyone else, and yet were not pulling their weight when it came to their work duties. It's a recipe for a toxic work environment.

[Sandman]

I’m getting that Backs is taking a “wait and see” approach when it comes to re-signing, and perhaps Lindholm is in the same boat. If Sutter being fired doesn’t change their minds, then that points to issues with teammates in one form or another. Might be best to look into trading them both if they’re still on the fence.

[Boreal]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Would sure like to know what this means ...



Negative leadership. Same leadership as the year before?

Sutter challenges players, and as much as he “changed”, he can still be reckless and derogatory in how he provides feedback. His response about Huberdeau leaving the bench to “take an S” was an example.

To me it seems he wants to evoke a response in order to see what players are made of and how they unite. It’s a trademark of his coaching style from Chicago to San Jose, here and LA.

Directly or indirectly through the media. He obviously has a method to his madness, while understanding the game and requirements for winning like few others.

Again, old tactics, which have & can work, but they are kind of like running an engine on dirty coal or fuel. Eventually things breakdown.

Players are way more intelligent now, and they want more intellectual reciprocity and respect from their coaches. Coaching is really just teaching. What’s the saying, “when one teaches, two learn.” The biggest difference between the two is teaching is about the process, and coaching (@ elite levels) is about the outcome. This ties back into Sutter reiterating that the NHL is not a developmental league. Sure,to an extent, it isn’t the AHL. However, if players aren’t growing, learning, and getting better teams will not get better, or the outcome they want.

Sutter also epitomizes the euphemism:

“You can be wrong or you can be an A-hole, but you can't be both.”

When you lose, the way they did, it’s self evident he was wrong.

It was the same when he was GM. The double edged sword of his stubborn brilliance.

[zuluking]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

I would guess that means Sutter is almost always negative. Browbeating players on the mistakes they make. Makes some sense as that would be his public persona as well.

The only issue I take with Backlund is that he was a leader. He didn't need a C to take charge of that room and help turn things around. Love the guy, but some of it is on him as well.

He literally said, "It's my responsibility too, so I don't blame others."

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Sandman

I’m getting that Backs is taking a “wait and see” approach when it comes to re-signing, and perhaps Lindholm is in the same boat. If Sutter being fired doesn’t change their minds, then that points to issues with teammates in one form or another. Might be best to look into trading them both if they’re still on the fence.

In regards to Backlund I don't think it has anything to do with teammates and everything to do with wanting to win a Cup before he runs out of time. If the Flames are not going to be competitive he isn't going to sign an extension. I think he ends up getting traded, I think if the Johansson deal had not gone down he would be an Avalanche right now.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Sandman

I’m getting that Backs is taking a “wait and see” approach when it comes to re-signing, and perhaps Lindholm is in the same boat. If Sutter being fired doesn’t change their minds, then that points to issues with teammates in one form or another. Might be best to look into trading them both if they’re still on the fence.

It also doesn't scream leadership. Leaders make decisions once they have the necessary information, not ponder for months. How could you still be unsure in mid July whether you want to stay long term or be traded somewhere else.

[Sandman]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

In regards to Backlund I don't think it has anything to do with teammates and everything to do with wanting to win a Cup before he runs out of time. If the Flames are not going to be competitive he isn't going to sign an extension. I think he ends up getting traded, I think if the Johansson deal had not gone down he would be an Avalanche right now.

That’s one of the big problems IMO. Most of the teams that would want a player like Backs or Lindy already made moves to plug their holes.

[Sandman]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

It also doesn't scream leadership. Leaders make decisions once they have the necessary information, not ponder for months. How could you still be unsure in mid July whether you want to stay long term or be traded somewhere else.

I agree, and I don’t think you want people on the team that are on the fence, and basically have publicly stated as much.

[Bandwagon Surfer]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Yeah, it seems pretty obvious that there was a problem in the room. I don't think Sutter was helping or that he was going to be the solution. Sutter's whole style pretty much demands that there is a strong bond in the room so that the players come together.

There was just too much major change in a short period of time. Just think about the dynamic in your own work places and what would happen if 2 or 3 popular leaders left and were replaced with guys that didn't have as much invested in the work place, got paid more (or were about to get paid more) than everyone else, and yet were not pulling their weight when it came to their work duties. It's a recipe for a toxic work environment.

I think management comes in by being too biased towards veterans.
Like management is looking for the leadership in the room to come from their overpaid veterans, and are not considering younger players. Which in turn pushes younger leadership candidates to go to other teams so that they can get a better shot at official leadership roles.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Backlund is entering his twilight and I can assume he wants to be on a contender. The Flames immediate future is somewhat in the air, holding off for him makes sense.

Lindholm has tons of time left, so he should be clear if he’s interested in sticking around long term. Immediate direction of the team shouldn’t weight into it as much.

[flamesgod]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

It also doesn't scream leadership. Leaders make decisions once they have the necessary information, not ponder for months. How could you still be unsure in mid July whether you want to stay long term or be traded somewhere else.

Because he still has a year left on his contract. He may want to see if this years team is going to be a playoff team before committing.

[Sainters7]

Yeah I'm having trouble pinning this mostly on Sutter, given he's been fired and players still sound like they're ready to jump ship. I thought he was fired to prevent this?

I have no doubt Sutter ruffled a lot of feathers and became one of the problems, but it also kinda sounds like a dysfunctional dressing room in general.

[Paulie Walnuts]

It's also easier to walk into a room like Florida with a establish captain.

Huberdeau, Kadri and Weegar walked into a room already in shambles from the shock departure of two key pieces with no captain and coach gone wild.

Also did Backlund say he is waiting and see how Huberdeau plays this season to make his mind up? Or did he talk about not having success in Calgary and wanting to win.

He said Huberdeau didn't click with this coach and many player didn't. Guys like Weegar and Coleman don't come out and say we needed a coaching change if it was a player issue.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by flamesgod

Because he still has a year left on his contract. He may want to see if this years team is going to be a playoff team before committing.

And if management/ownership are letting these guys play out the year to see how it goes, they're letting the players run the asylum AND team construction.

Sign or trade before the season starts has to be the only option. Not much is changing between now and then so make a decision.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

And if management/ownership are letting these guys play out the year to see how it goes, they're letting the players run the asylum AND team construction.

Sign or trade before the season starts has to be the only option. Not much is changing between now and then so make a decision.

Well, it isn’t. Trading at the deadline is the last possible option. And Conroy has said essentially said as much, that players will be moved by then.

If the market sucks now, then it sucks now. It’s not going to get significantly worse at the deadline. Contenders will want to add centres, they won’t be offering peanuts and letting their competition buy up a centre for a late first.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by 868904

Sutter haters will read whatever they want. It’s pretty clear from that article that the original core is not sure about the new guys brought in and I’d say very specifically, Huberdeau and Kadri, as Weegar seems to have fit in with everyone.

If they were sure those guys are the players their reputations suggest they are, they’d have re-signed by now. I mean who wouldn’t want to play with a 115 point play making winger and a Stanley cup winning gritty second line centre? But that’s not who those guys were last year and the guys aren’t sure it wasn’t just because of Sutter. Also, Sutter was the same the year before as Backlund clearly states, so it wasn’t fun for Gaudreau and Tkachuk neither, but those guys performed, they excelled instead of quitting. That is, those two guys performed in the face of adversity and the two new guys did not and those two guys are the two highest paid guys for the next 6 years, they are the horses that will be pulling this wagon. It’s clear that there is a lack of confidence in the top of this roster and Lindholm and Backlund want to see what Huberdeau and Kadri can do this season before extending.

Those two guys performed to get paid and get the heck out of here the first chance they got. If they loved it so much they would have came back for more money and more of Sutter.

Kadri had a soft effort at the end of the year, but Huberdeau never quit.

[flamesgod]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

And if management/ownership are letting these guys play out the year to see how it goes, they're letting the players run the asylum AND team construction.

Sign or trade before the season starts has to be the only option. Not much is changing between now and then so make a decision.

That would be managements decision, not Backlunds. I didn't refer to what management might be thinking, only how Backlund might be viewing this.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

Team was bad
Sutter came and fixed it
Team was bad again

I doubt Sutter is the only problem

I can pinpoint it to 2 all star wingers leaving, making us "bad" again. And even then, we were close to making the playoffs as is, with a struggling Huberdeau, Mangiapane, Markstrom, etc.

The downfall was not adjusting. Sutter did what Sutter wanted and that wasn't enough. Imagine with the season on the line, you put in Ritchie as a shootout shooter.

I am sure Backlund and others who have been there for a while can get their fair share of blame. However, they don't call the shots on minutes usage.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

Well, it isn’t. Trading at the deadline is the last possible option. And Conroy has said essentially said as much, that players will be moved by then.

How can you take that risk with these main pieces?

10 guys in contract years. A couple of promising rookies in Coronato and Pelletier looking to carve out a permanent spot. Duehr and Ruzicka rounding into solid full time players. The rest of the roster should be significantly motivated to have way better seasons plus a new coaching staff wanting to make an impression.

No one can see the future but it's not impossible that the team is high in the division at the trade deadline and well positioned for playoffs. Not a chance Edwards lets these guys be traded at the deadline and a playoff team taken off the tracks.