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

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by traptor

Depends if the ask is reasonable and extends to other teams.

If he will only stay in calgary if he's getting 5x5 but will play somewhere else for 2x3.5 the I would argue that he is unwilling to re-sign here.

That may be a valid argument.

He can’t go out and see what the market is for him a year from now, though

The only thing he knows for sure is what the Flames are offering right now

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by Samonadreau

The problem isnt the return the team would get waiting until the deadline, it's if the team is on the bubble or in a playoff spot heading up to the deadline. Then what??

If they're too dumb to see what Nashville did after trading a lot of vets last year, than they'll never learn. I think if the longer term guys know this going into the season that the pending UFA's could be dealt and the team might be younger post deadline. They can embrace it and have that prove the pundits wrong..we can still win without them attitude.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Man i absolutely love your timing. 2 posts before the revelation that he has already decided not to re-sign in Calgary.

Gold. Total gold.

What revelation? It is more likely that term is the simple hold up than Backlund having made a firm decision.

There have only been 2 notable early extensions (Kopitar, Sorokin) of the 40 or 50 notable guys expiring next year. It's simply a waiting game.

Originally Posted by traptor

Depends if the ask is reasonable and extends to other teams.

If he will only stay in calgary if he's getting 5x5 but will play somewhere else for 2x3.5 the I would argue that he is unwilling to re-sign here.

Sure, but there is no reason to believe Backlund is living in Fantasyland

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

What revelation? It is more likely that term is the simple hold up than Backlund having made a firm decision.

He's referring to the tweet - but some have said that was a bad translation.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

If they're too dumb to see what Nashville did after trading a lot of vets last year, than they'll never learn. I think if the longer term guys know this going into the season that the pending UFA's could be dealt and the team might be younger post deadline. They can embrace it and have that prove the pundits wrong..we can still win without them attitude.

With essentially three GMs in the room I think it would be a stretch to think they haven't pondered what happens if they are good enough to make the playoffs but sitting on assets.

Could come down to the owner saying no for sure.

But then we haven't seen Edwards potentially losing 1/3 of his roster with no return.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Bingo

With essentially three GMs in the room I think it would be a stretch to think they haven't pondered what happens if they are good enough to make the playoffs but sitting on assets.

Could come down to the owner saying no for sure.

But then we haven't seen Edwards potentially losing 1/3 of his roster with no return.

Do you think seeing what Treliving did last summer he thinks he can gamble by letting us try to compete with these guys and if they walk we can just replace them in free agency?

Don't think its that simple and it took a lot of work and cost us a 1st round pick to rebound from the losses last summer.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by Bingo

With essentially three GMs in the room I think it would be a stretch to think they haven't pondered what happens if they are good enough to make the playoffs but sitting on assets.

Could come down to the owner saying no for sure.

But then we haven't seen Edwards potentially losing 1/3 of his roster with no return.

Yeah it's a possibility too. Although I think the Gaudreau thing stung a few guys and it's still pretty fresh.

The other thing which is purely speculation on my part is that the hated evil N. Murray Edward's...may have a bit of a different outlook today with reasonable assurances that he has a nice new arena on the way. He can see the forest thru the trees so I suspect he may allow Management some flexibility to make deals that give the team a better shot of being able to compete when he's looking to open that building and increasing the cost of the product he's selling.

If not...well the Flames should have lots of cap space about 50 weeks from now.

[Poe969]

What would be worse, losing all the UFA'S for nothing or keeping them and give them bad contracts?

Losing then for nothing would bee better IMO. The team has shown they're not good enough and the only way to make any meaningful changes, not keep them together.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Poe969

What would be worse, losing all the UFA'S for nothing or keeping them and give them bad contracts?

Losing then for nothing would bee better IMO. The team has shown they're not good enough and the only way to make any meaningful changes, not keep them together.

With a new coaching staff and some roster changes, including added youth, this team hasn’t actually shown anything yet.

We’ll have to wait and see what they are.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Poe969

What would be worse, losing all the UFA'S for nothing or keeping them and give them bad contracts?

Losing then for nothing would bee better IMO. The team has shown they're not good enough and the only way to make any meaningful changes, not keep them together.

You are ranking options 3 and 4

Options 1 and 2 are both better.

Keep them and give them good contracts, or
Trade them for assets

In no particular order

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

You are ranking options 3 and 4

Options 1 and 2 are both better.

Keep them and give them good contracts, or
Trade them for assets

In no particular order

Keeping them and giving them good contracts is likely not an option.

Very few UFA's contracts turn out good in the long run.

Teams do them to contend during a window of contention, but it's largely known they will eventually stink.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Man i absolutely love your timing. 2 posts before the revelation that he has already decided not to re-sign in Calgary.

Gold. Total gold.

Because I speculated on something? That happens constantly in this thread, not sure why mine is total gold.

[Poe969]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

You are ranking options 3 and 4

Options 1 and 2 are both better.

Keep them and give them good contracts, or
Trade them for assets

In no particular order

So what's a good contract for these guys? Do you think giving Lindholm 9 mill for 8 years would end well? They already have a lot of money tied up in older players (or players that will be old) and that's already hampering their cap situation.

Everyone talks about the "injection of youth" but the Flames don't really have any blue chip prospects, other than Wolf and with goalies who knows, to step into the lineup and make a diffference. And as for new coaching, we have no idea if they'll be bad but we also have no idea if they'll be good. The key players on the team are more likely to decline than improve.

I hope to God this team can somehow pull it together but this is just the same pattern it has been for years. They likely will do good because it's a good bad pattern, but the main issue is that they're never bad enough to get a good prospect and then they're never good enough to really make any noise in the playoffs.

I would rather let every UFA walk for nothing than give out long term deals to keep this team of "maybe" together. And as for signing them to good contracts, if they were going to accept good contracts, they would have by now. And if you're thinking about trading them for good assets, the market for the players they have doesn't seem great right now. You can say it's bad timing and blame it on anyth ing and everything but the franchise needs to find a way to take control and capitalize on their current situation.

[rhino]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I think Backlund is perfectly suited to be a deadline trade - would cost a team very little (next to nothing, if the Flames retained some), and is a solid and versatile 2/3 C who can be used in all situations, including playing with elite talent.

Any team that thinks they have a legit shot this year would LOVE to add Backlund for the run. If you already have strong depth at C, this makes you insanely deep

You think a player like Backlund and what he brings will be a small cost IF the Flames retain?

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

Do you think seeing what Treliving did last summer he thinks he can gamble by letting us try to compete with these guys and if they walk we can just replace them in free agency?

Don't think its that simple and it took a lot of work and cost us a 1st round pick to rebound from the losses last summer.

Flames need to suck for a couple years and gain some high draft picks.... This would give us something beyond Huberdeau and Kadri.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by rhino

You think a player like Backlund and what he brings will be a small cost IF the Flames retain?

He was talking about cap hit. If the Flames retained on Backlund at the deadline a contender would need very little available cap to add him for the stretch/playoffs.

That alone should improve the return in futures that they'd be willing to pay for him.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by rhino

You think a player like Backlund and what he brings will be a small cost IF the Flames retain?

I said he would be very little cost - and next to nothing if they retained. Failing to see where you're going here.

[gvitaly]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1680980983296737282

[DJones]

Good, glad he made a decision so it's not a will he/won't he all year

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Samonadreau

The problem isnt the return the team would get waiting until the deadline, it's if the team is on the bubble or in a playoff spot heading up to the deadline. Then what??

You just trade him.

I would hope the Flames braintrust isn't like some addict who has to throw out all their alcohol because they can't be trusted to make a smart decision if they keep Backlund. If they are so dopey that they have to take a 4th now instead of a 2nd at the trade deadline because they are worried that come January/February they won't trade him because they might make the playoffs... then we've got a terrible front office.