2014/2015 Trade Speculation and Rumors

[Crumpy-Gunt]

Originally Posted by Igster

I like Backlund, but his offense does not fit a second line C role. He is a very good third line C. I really don't see the correlation with Bennett and Backlund. You can have both on the same team IMO. Bennett most likely will end up being a #1 C, while Monahan a very, very good second line C and then Backlund at #3 is perfect. Stajan at #4 and Flames are set.

Shore
Jankowski
Arnold
Granlund
Colborne
Probs someone we draft this year

All may have something to say about those bottom 2 center positions

[codynw]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

But we don't have that. It doesn't make a lot of sense to be thinking about trading Backlund before we even have a potential replacement in the organization.

It would be nice if Backlund was a couple inches bigger and a little better at faceoffs, but until we acquire a player that plays a two-way game as well as he does, in addition to those other qualities, Backlund will play a big role for this team.

He isn't there yet, but I think Shore will take over the Backlund role for this team one day.

[bubbsy]

I'm all for re-signing Backlund as long as it's done within the realm of what a decent 3rd line center makes. The offense just isn't there to deem him a 2nd line Center.

BTW, i'd love it if the flames went after Gelinas from the Devils somehow. Would be an awesome addition to round out the pairings.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by codynw

He isn't there yet, but I think Shore will take over the Backlund role for this team one day.

I think that might be a bit of an optimistic assumption.

Backlund is less than 2 years older than Shore and was more developed at the same age.

Backlund does a lot that Shore can't. Backlund does a lot of things that nobody else on the team can do.

[Vinny01]

With the whole analytics craze I feel Backlund's agent is going to be pushing for a big contract $4-$5M per season for 4-6 years. I could be wrong but Backlund is a poster child for analytics from what I have read. His lack of scoring and injury history are worrisome and I hope the Flames can lock him up for $3-3.5M for 3-4 years

[AC]

Shore has gotten a lot of attention so far, but I haven't really noticed him in any of his games played yet.

Treliving mentioned Shore was the player they got the most calls about on trade deadline day. So how he does in camp will be really interesting. He either makes the team or we lose him on waivers / via trade again.

[DoubleF]

If it were me... for centres...

Next season
Money
Backlund/Bennett 2a/2b; aiming for Backlund to be 2b after a while
Stajan
Trade excess centre kids not in long term or for other options (ie: Reinhart)

Season after
Stajan traded, centre kid takes role (assumed he's been on Stag's or Backlund's wing for a season.

This assumes we will have lots of wing/C players. This proposal doesn't even fully make sense to me, because we have so many centres on the farm not including one ones we have yet to draft in next two drafts.

I like Granlund, but he would be a guy I trade for D, or to bump up a pick if necessary. Centres I would consider shipping out... Granlund, Arnold and Shore.

Being the GM would suck. I have a feeling Treliving and Burke will need to trade out a LOT of kids in the coming few years

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I really like Backlund. And I really like that Backlund loves being a Flame.

But the bottom line for me is that, once Bennett is up to speed on the 2nd line, we need size, physicality, and solid face-offs from that #3 C position. And I don't think Backlund is that guy.

He would fetch a real good return as well.

I agree that there will come a day when guys like Backlund (and Stajan, Jones and Hudler) eventually get pushed down and out of the roster, but I think it will be done internally and not by external moves like UFA signings and trades. (So I agree with what you are saying above) The worst thing that could happen from this years run is thinking our rebuild is farther along then it is right now, and going out to get "now" players that lock up cap room. There is nothing wrong with keeping the current assets we have now until guys like Bennett, Poirer, Arnold, Jankowski, Hickey, Wotherspoon et al are ready. Any depth deals I see to create "competitive competition" like last year are done IMO, the vets to create this competition are already here (Raymond, Engelland, Smid) which is why I don't really see any real major moves; the push will come from within.

[handgroen]

for the first time i can remember, i don't have any suggestions for flames management.

Can this lineup be improved through the free agent market? sure!
how about through trade? yep i suppose so!
trade assets for draft picks? why not!
trade draft picks for assets? that works too!
stand pat and let the team you have develop over time? count me in!
take on salary through trade for compensation? absolutely!

this is the most contented i've ever felt as a flames fan.

and it's so refreshing to not obsess over other teams assets, not to be glued to the this trade thread, to not really mind which way management goes about the draft this year.

things are certainly looking up.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

I hope the Flames can lock him up for $3-3.5M for 3-4 years

I think they can. The way I see it Backlund can be for us going forward what Bolland was to the Hawks. A 0.5PPG player with an excellent two-way game that you can play in all situations. That's pretty valuable.

[bubbsy]

Ramo to Oilers?

Oh eklund....

There is no question that Karri Ramo raised his stock greatly in these playoffs and has apparently propelled himself to the top of the UFA Goalie class....

...
The most intriguing possibility could see Ramo simply moving North in Alberta to take over the Oilers starting spot. A great fit obviously....

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=68597

[868904]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

Ramo to Oilers?

Oh eklund....



http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=68597

Why would Ramo commit career suicide? Unless Dave Tippet or Ken Hitchcock end up in Edmonton, no goalie in their right mind should sign there unless it's for big dollars and big term, cause it could be your last contract.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by 868904

Why would Ramo commit career suicide? Unless Dave Tippet or Ken Hitchcock end up in Edmonton, no goalie in their right mind should sign there unless it's for big dollars and big term, cause it could be your last contract.

Sillyness of this post aside.

I would imagine Ramo may have to take a hard look at the Flames before thinking of signing. You have 2 goalies already under 1 way contracts (Not to mention gillies on the up and up). If he sees a possibility elsewhere then he may take it (not saying Edmonton). But I would not be surprised if he goes to July 1 to test the market.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Friedman says he expects the Devils to trade Eric Gelinas.

Devils likely looking for a forward back.

Originally Posted by Ashasx

The second this team trades Backlund, people are going to realize how much he meant to this team.

Would be a huge mistake.

You gotta give to get. The Flames blue-line depth is dire. If we want to support the young core of forwards with a young defender who has top-4 potential, it's going to cost. Spare parts won't cut it.

Or we could just cross our fingers and hope one of the young d-men in the system makes a big and unexpected jump. Because none of those guys currently have the pedigree of Gelinas, and anyone we draft will most likely be 4-6 years away from being an effective NHLer.

Anyway, it doesn't look like Gelinas will be moved anyway. Or it would cost more than Backlund. And it's not as though Backlund is going to excite any team looking for help scoring.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

But we don't have that. It doesn't make a lot of sense to be thinking about trading Backlund before we even have a potential replacement in the organization.

It would be nice if Backlund was a couple inches bigger and a little better at faceoffs, but until we acquire a player that plays a two-way game as well as he does, in addition to those other qualities, Backlund will play a big role for this team.

No we don't. But Backlund isn't it either. But he is a very good player that would fetch a nice return for someone that we NEED.

Right now, as a 2nd line C, Stajan can't replace him. But as a 3rd line C, Stajan - and possibly Shore or Jooris or Arnold going forward - can replace him until we can get the perfect guy.

Would Stajan be as good in that role as Backlund? Probably not, but the difference isn't huge.

And if Backlund could fetch us a good young defenseman, the team is better overall.

It's not a question of not liking Backlund, it's a question of whether he fits as a 3rd line C, and how much better in that role he is over others, vs what we could get for him.

[wingmaker]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

No we don't. But Backlund isn't it either. But he is a very good player that would fetch a nice return for someone that we NEED.

Right now, as a 2nd line C, Stajan can't replace him. But as a 3rd line C, Stajan - and possibly Shore or Jooris or Arnold going forward - can replace him until we can get the perfect guy.

Would Stajan be as good in that role as Backlund? Probably not, but the difference isn't huge.

And if Backlund could fetch us a good young defenseman, the team is better overall.

It's not a question of not liking Backlund, it's a question of whether he fits as a 3rd line C, and how much better in that role he is over others, vs what we could get for him.

Agreed. Also, it is a question of strengths and weaknesses. Centre is actually a position of strength in the organization. Defence is not. Two of our top four defencemen are in their thirties. So how do we get a young top 4 defenceman? Probably through trade. And if you go through the roster, there are limited players that would actually fetch a high end return. Obviously Monahan, Gaudreau, and Bennett are not going anywhere. Then you move on to Backlund, Ferland, Bouma as young players other teams might go out of their way to acquire. And really Backlund is probably the most marketable and also the position the Flames are best prepared to replace.

I absolutely love Backlund but he is still an RFA and right now is value is probably as high as ever for a trade chip. If we were to go after a young defenceman with top 4 or top 2 skill, I feel like he is the cost.

Unless of course Treliving can pull of a steal by packaging other young pieces and draft picks. That would be amazing, but seems very unlikely.

[868904]

The problem with Backlund now and in the future is his size. He's just not big enough to be a top notch shut down centre. He's not a big enough agitator to get the opposition off their game either. He's only average on faceoffs. So how is he going to shut down anyone? I don't think you can say he shut down anyone in these playoffs.

He doesn't have the offense to be a 2nd line centre and he doesn't have the physical and mental traits to be a shutdown centre. So what is he?

I really think that Colborne has much better potential to be a 3rd line shut down centre for this team going forward. He's got the size, the speed, and the skill, and in this playoffs he showed he can play with a physical edge with some beauty hits. Colborne was also a bit of an agitator in the playoffs too.

I think if you get a good offer for Backlund or if he demands too much money, you deal him. I just don't see a defined role for him to excel in.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Right now, as a 2nd line C, Stajan can't replace him. But as a 3rd line C, Stajan - and possibly Shore or Jooris or Arnold going forward - can replace him until we can get the perfect guy.

Matt Stajan is 31. Mikael Backlund is 26.

So you're talking about replacing a guy with another guy who is not as good now nor likely to be as good going forward (and some magic beans). Sorry, I'm just pretty sure the second we lose Mikael Backlund the team is going to need to try and find someone like Mikael Backlund. I'm wholly not in favour of the team filling one hole by creating another.

Not that it really matters... I don't think there's a good trade to be had. What we need folk won't give up. I very much doubt that anyone has a legit top four 24-26 year old NHL defenseman they'd be willing to part with.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Parallex

Matt Stajan is 31. Mikael Backlund is 26.

So you're talking about replacing a guy with another guy who is not as good now nor likely to be as good going forward (and some magic beans). Sorry, I'm just pretty sure the second we lose Mikael Backlund the team is going to need to try and find someone like Mikael Backlund. I'm wholly not in favour of the team filling one hole by creating another.

Not that it really matters... I don't think there's a good trade to be had. What we need folk won't give up. I very much doubt that anyone has a legit top four 24-26 year old NHL defenseman they'd be willing to part with.

I wasn't suggesting Stajan is a permanent answer. I am saying Stajan is a sufficient answer until the spot is filled permanently.

Jooris, Arnold, Shore and Jankowski are guys currently in the system that may become the answer. Or that is a position filled by trade or free agency.

The point is that there are better solutions than Backlund for a #3 C role. And Backlund is worth a lot in trade.

For me, the bottom line for Backlund is that he isn't going to be in our top 6, and he isn't physical enough for the bottom 6. But he can help get us a young D that would really help fill the gap in our D prospects

[Cflames_12.5]

The Backlund debate will be interesting this summer.