[Signing] Backlund re-signs. 6 years, AAV $5.35M

[Erick Estrada]

I hope that the contract situation has been a distraction for him because I personally don't think he's been that good this season. If this is the best we have to look forward to from him over the next six seasons this contract is not going to look so hot. He's already benefitted big time by playing with Tkachuk and that's not likely going to last forever and with lesser players I think he's going to be a 30 point player at best.

[locsofblu]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I hope that the contract situation has been a distraction for him because I personally don't think he's been that good this season. If this is the best we have to look forward to from him over the next six seasons this contract is not going to look so hot. He's already benefitted big time by playing with Tkachuk and that's not likely going to last forever and with lesser players I think he's going to be a 30 point player at best.

I agree as well. This hasn't been his best season and I imagine he would have fetched a decent return.

[Philly06Cup]

My theory of building a serious cup contender:

1) stack your team with elite talent. Guys who make other people around them better. Pay them if you have to.
2) have a bunch of ELC guys play way over their expectation
3) fill our the rest of your roster for whatever is lacking with whatever money is left, squeezing as much value as you can.

This is how most teams have won their cups. Elite guys are not only great, they turn 1M linemates into 3M players. Worth every penny. ELC contracts speak for themselves.

Backlund to me fits (3), but it's not particularly good value. at 'fmv' I find him very expendable. Compare his contract to any elite forward. Which cap usage is better: Phil Kessel (6.8) or Backlund (5.4) + 1.4M scrub? Stamkos (8.5) or Backlund + 3.1M scrub? The answer is the elite player *by a mile*. Alternatively, that cap space is better spent on bridge contracts for janko/bennett/whomever and hoping they outplay their contract. Then, any savings can be used to acquire another elite player.

[Enoch Root]

Kessel signed that deal several years ago, and the Leafs are retaining salary.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Philly06Cup

My theory of building a serious cup contender:

1) stack your team with elite talent. Guys who make other people around them better. Pay them if you have to.
2) have a bunch of ELC guys play way over their expectation
3) fill our the rest of your roster for whatever is lacking with whatever money is left, squeezing as much value as you can.

This is how most teams have won their cups. Elite guys are not only great, they turn 1M linemates into 3M players. Worth every penny. ELC contracts speak for themselves.

Backlund to me fits (3), but it's not particularly good value. at 'fmv' I find him very expendable. Compare his contract to any elite forward. Which cap usage is better: Phil Kessel (6.8) or Backlund (5.4) + 1.4M scrub? Stamkos (8.5) or Backlund + 3.1M scrub? The answer is the elite player *by a mile*. Alternatively, that cap space is better spent on bridge contracts for janko/bennett/whomever and hoping they outplay their contract. Then, any savings can be used to acquire another elite player.

Backlund isn't our Kessel/Stamkos though, so I don't know why you're making that comparison.

Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk, Giordano, and Hamilton are our elite group.

Backlund is a support player.

How exactly do you acquire another elite player? Backlund is "good money spent" in my eyes, and the only glaring cap problems with have today or going forward sit with Stajan being overpaid (expiring) and Brouwer. You can't pay a 13th forward 4.5M - however, you can pay a 2nd line centre 5.35M though.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Philly06Cup

My theory of building a serious cup contender:

1) stack your team with elite talent. Guys who make other people around them better. Pay them if you have to.
2) have a bunch of ELC guys play way over their expectation
3) fill our the rest of your roster for whatever is lacking with whatever money is left, squeezing as much value as you can.

This is how most teams have won their cups. Elite guys are not only great, they turn 1M linemates into 3M players. Worth every penny. ELC contracts speak for themselves.

Backlund to me fits (3), but it's not particularly good value. at 'fmv' I find him very expendable. Compare his contract to any elite forward. Which cap usage is better: Phil Kessel (6.8) or Backlund (5.4) + 1.4M scrub? Stamkos (8.5) or Backlund + 3.1M scrub? The answer is the elite player *by a mile*. Alternatively, that cap space is better spent on bridge contracts for janko/bennett/whomever and hoping they outplay their contract. Then, any savings can be used to acquire another elite player.

You forgot to add the cost of an additional scrub to Kessel and Stamkos.

[wingmaker]

Originally Posted by Philly06Cup

My theory of building a serious cup contender:

1) stack your team with elite talent. Guys who make other people around them better. Pay them if you have to.
2) have a bunch of ELC guys play way over their expectation
3) fill our the rest of your roster for whatever is lacking with whatever money is left, squeezing as much value as you can.

This is how most teams have won their cups. Elite guys are not only great, they turn 1M linemates into 3M players. Worth every penny. ELC contracts speak for themselves.

Backlund to me fits (3), but it's not particularly good value. at 'fmv' I find him very expendable. Compare his contract to any elite forward. Which cap usage is better: Phil Kessel (6.8) or Backlund (5.4) + 1.4M scrub? Stamkos (8.5) or Backlund + 3.1M scrub? The answer is the elite player *by a mile*. Alternatively, that cap space is better spent on bridge contracts for janko/bennett/whomever and hoping they outplay their contract. Then, any savings can be used to acquire another elite player.

This is just some theory you have that doesn't correspond to reality at all. Please, show me which team only has players that conveniently slot into the three categories you have arbitrarily come up with?

Backlund DOES make the players around him better. He has for three seasons now. Like, actually every player that has cycled through his line. It's a little rich that people now want to credit Tkachuk with Backlund's success when Backlund propped up Tkachuk's game last season, and Bennett's before that, and Colbourn's, and recently Brouwer's. Give me a break.

[Matt Reeeeead]

Originally Posted by transplant99

And 9 seasons of data shows something different......thats my point.



I hope he hits 60 points...hell i hope he hits 100, but that doesnt change the fact he hasnt, and almost assuredly wont as he gets older. I would like to see what he does with a different wingman on his left, as I think thats what will define how good this deal is when all is said and done. Unless we are OK with paying 5+ per, for a really good defensive specialist, which is what he is if he regresses to his norm, he needs to produce at a clip he simply hasnt done for more than 2 1/2 years yet. I think he can, but there is a real risk he doesnt.



This contract has every chance to blow up in the Flames face as it does to be a good value...which is why several people dont particularly like the term. Though, admittedly, its a better gamble to have him on the team than not, and this was the price to make that happen.

What the heck do you think "9 years worth of data " is actually bringing to the table? In analyzing who backlund is today, I do not care at all what backlund did during his developing years. It's not relevant information.

3 year recent splits is a commonly accepted amount of time to define a player's current skill level. It's a long enough period of time to remove statistical noise and helps define what a player is capable of doing.

The recent seasons peg backlund right at the 50 point average over 82 game mark that you are saying doesn't define him. It's a weird take and pretty basic analysis shows you are factually incorrect.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by wingmaker

This is just some theory you have that doesn't correspond to reality at all. Please, show me which team only has players that conveniently slot into the three categories you have arbitrarily come up with?

Backlund DOES make the players around him better. He has for three seasons now. Like, actually every player that has cycled through his line. It's a little rich that people now want to credit Tkachuk with Backlund's success when Backlund propped up Tkachuk's game last season, and Bennett's before that, and Colbourn's, and recently Brouwer's. Give me a break.

He didn't make the players around him good enough.

Since the start of the 2015-16 the Flames are 110-94-19 for 239 pts... good enough for 19th spot within the league.

Since the start of 2014-15 they are 155-126-26 good for 18th spot in the league.

With Backlund being such a strong 2nd line centre the Flames are definitely not in the top half of the league.

He is pretty well slotted in as the Flames 2C for the next 5 years.

Definition of crazy ... doing the same thing expecting different results.


The Flames either have messed up with the other 8 long term deals or they are messing up with his.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Matt Reeeeead

What the heck do you think "9 years worth of data " is actually bringing to the table? In analyzing who backlund is today, I do not care at all what backlund did during his developing years. It's not relevant information.

3 year recent splits is a commonly accepted amount of time to define a player's current skill level. It's a long enough period of time to remove statistical noise and helps define what a player is capable of doing.

The recent seasons peg backlund right at the 50 point average over 82 game mark that you are saying doesn't define him. It's a weird take and pretty basic analysis shows you are factually incorrect.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That he isnt consistently a 50 point player. What was being discussed.

If you want to claim he has been a 50ish pt player the last 3 years, great. If 3 years defines consistency of a 9 year career, then we are debating completely different things.

Pretty straight forward stuff.

[jonkaupp]

Originally Posted by transplant99

That he isnt consistently a 50 point player. What was being discussed.

If you want to claim he has been a 50ish pt player the last 3 years, great. If 3 years defines consistency of a 9 year career, then we are debating completely different things.

Pretty straight forward stuff.

No and that is very bizarre logic. Three years in a row is definitely consistent and recency bias is very important when assessing a player. That’s like pointing at Jarome Iginla and saying ‘we should sign him, consistent 40 goal scorer’

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by jonkaupp

No and that is very bizarre logic. Three years in a row is definitely consistent and recency bias is very important when assessing a player. That’s like pointing at Jarome Iginla and saying ‘we should sign him, consistent 40 goal scorer’

No, its actually nothing like that at all, and since you want to enter the world of absurd, there is nothing left to discuss.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

He didn't make the players around him good enough.

Since the start of the 2015-16 the Flames are 110-94-19 for 239 pts... good enough for 19th spot within the league.

Since the start of 2014-15 they are 155-126-26 good for 18th spot in the league.

With Backlund being such a strong 2nd line centre the Flames are definitely not in the top half of the league.

He is pretty well slotted in as the Flames 2C for the next 5 years.

Definition of crazy ... doing the same thing expecting different results.


The Flames either have messed up with the other 8 long term deals or they are messing up with his.

Hmmm... Flames not a top-half team during their rebuild and transition out of it. Who'd have thought?

[wingmaker]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

He didn't make the players around him good enough.

Since the start of the 2015-16 the Flames are 110-94-19 for 239 pts... good enough for 19th spot within the league.

Since the start of 2014-15 they are 155-126-26 good for 18th spot in the league.

With Backlund being such a strong 2nd line centre the Flames are definitely not in the top half of the league.

He is pretty well slotted in as the Flames 2C for the next 5 years.

Definition of crazy ... doing the same thing expecting different results.


The Flames either have messed up with the other 8 long term deals or they are messing up with his.

Explain to me how subtracting Backlund but keeping the rest of the team the same makes them better. Even if they traded Brodie and Backlund and some of their best prospects, I don't see how they get significantly better in the short term. Only way would be to trade for futures and hope it works out better in a few years, at which point you may as well trade Gaudreau or Monahan.

The Flames already have the team that they are going to win with or not. They can add some more scoring on the wings, they could use a defender to trade for more scoring, but fundamentally this team is either going to succeed or not as constructed. Backlund is part of it. Even if they somehow found some magical second line centre better than him, he slides down and is the best third line centre in the league. And no, 5.35 million is not a number that is going to cost the Flames another skilled player. They have amazing value in the Gaudreau, Monahan, Hamilton, Brodie, and Smith contracts. They have the room to make it work. Plenty of other players in Stajan, Brouwer, Frolik, and Stone whose contracts can be dealt with to make room if needs be.

Hard to see how this is a bad contract in the short term. The only argument is that it will be bad in the last couple of years. By that time, the Flames will have many other issues they will have to deal with anyway. This deal is about winning in the next two to three years.

[Matt Reeeeead]

Originally Posted by transplant99

That he isnt consistently a 50 point player. What was being discussed.



If you want to claim he has been a 50ish pt player the last 3 years, great. If 3 years defines consistency of a 9 year career, then we are debating completely different things.



Pretty straight forward stuff.

You are arguing semantics and belabouring a point that doesn't matter.

We are trying to define who backlund is today and over the next 6 years.

His most recent 3 years is a comfortable period of time to define who he is today and what kind of production we can expect from him.

That's all that matters. Few players have consistent trends over the entirety of their careers. Developing years, peak, downhill aging. You won't have much success trying to define a players expected consistent production adding up the various pieces of their life cycle.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by transplant99

That he isnt consistently a 50 point player. What was being discussed.

If you want to claim he has been a 50ish pt player the last 3 years, great. If 3 years defines consistency of a 9 year career, then we are debating completely different things.

Pretty straight forward stuff.

Originally Posted by transplant99

No, its actually nothing like that at all, and since you want to enter the world of absurd, there is nothing left to discuss.

You're being a little foolish here, imo. His last three years (especially with a late bloomer like Backlund) is 100 times more relevant than his entire 9 year career, that's had struggles and complete changes in training and playing style.

[Stay Golden]

For a second line Center with consistant Second line PP minutes being the league for 7-8 seasons I am not convinced his career high 53 points justify's a 6 year extension of 5.35m per year.
I will say this I hope the main reason he has been not as good the last month or so is because of hopfully the distraction of negotiations. In his own end he has not been as reliable which is where he is strongest.
The team needs him to get his game back on track.
Since the start of 2018 10 pts, minus 5. Last point 8 games ago.

[jonkaupp]

Originally Posted by transplant99

No, its actually nothing like that at all, and since you want to enter the world of absurd, there is nothing left to discuss.

Ya it was an absurd joke designed to point how absurd your point is.

[bizaro86]

He will be good value now and poor value later. If he was willing to sign for 3 years he'd get way more than that on the open market. The discount now is paid back on the overpayment later.

This is probably win-win. Backing gets guaranteed career earnings, and the flames borrow cap space from he future when they're in win-now mode.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by the2bears

Hmmm... Flames not a top-half team during their rebuild and transition out of it. Who'd have thought?

Hmmmm.... All of the key guys involved in this not top half team over the last 3-4 years are all locked up for the next 3-5 years using up 80% of the cap space.

Locking up the key players on a contending team makes a lot of sense.... locking up guys that produce mediocre results .... well that sort of indicates that mediocrity is the end target.