What if Backlund is not re-signed by the trade deadline?

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Trading Backlund for a RW puts us right back to having the worst collection of Cs in the division.

Seems like some hyperbole there. Monahan, Bennett, Jankowski, Lazar and Stajan is quite obviously better than Vegas's centres. I think I'd take them over VAN as well.

I'm all for keeping Backlund but let's not make it out like the other guys are scrubs.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Seems like some hyperbole there. Monahan, Bennett, Jankowski, Lazar and Stajan is quite obviously better than Vegas's centres. I think I'd take them over VAN as well.

I'm all for keeping Backlund but let's not make it out like the other guys are scrubs.

Yikes, that is not much beyond potential after Monahan. They are not scrubs but very, very unproven.

[Vinny01]

Definitely not interested in paying Backlund over $6M for his 30+ years.

Bennett and/or Jankowski need to have a breakout season before the organization could even think about moving Backlund.

I was a fan in favor of shopping Backs because I did not want the Flames to pay him 6x6 for until he is 35. I would hate to lose a Tkachuk or Bennett in a couple years because Gio and Backlund are taking up $13M in cap space in their 30's. Once the Flames moved their unprotected first next year it became too risky to trade Backlund.

My hope now is Backlund signs a team friendly deal in and around $5M per for 4-5 years.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Trading Backlund for a RW puts us right back to having the worst collection of Cs in the division.

Backlund is a great player and if we trade him, it will almost certainly be for pieces that are less valuable

It absolutely boggles my mind how fans want to trade players the moment they become good. Backlund is a key piece and, with the style he plays, he should continue to be a key piece for at least 3 or 4 years.

The whole point of acquiring good players is to build a team. We have a team for the next 3 to 5 years (at least). Let's try to win with it,instead of trading it for more future parts.

Nobody has said that he MUST be traded. My issue is that you cannot commit long terms to players like Backlund who is peaked or close to peaking. The guy will be 29 years old next year and it's safe to say last season or this season will likely be his career seasons and he's going to start slowly tapering down into his 30's. Flames will basically be overpaying him into his 30's and I simply don't see a guy that's going to be a 40-50 point player in a few years. I look at what the Penguins did with Jordan Staal who is a similar player to Backlund. They cut bait rather than overpay him for a long term and it was clearly the right move. His current deal with the Hurricanes is horrible and the Flames would be staring at the same mistake.

I realize that fans get attached to players but you simply cannot keep everyone in a salary capped league and some times the least popular decisions with fans are the best decisions. I would rather keep Hamonic and/or Brodie than attach my wagon to Backlund long term. I have no idea what term or money the Backlund camp is looking but if I'm the GM I would be offering him $4 million per season over 5 years if he wants the term because I know he's not going to be better than a $4 million player over the next five seasons. Even at that I'm not very comfortable handing him a contract that takes him to 34 years old.

I think they get a deal done but if the asking price is around $5 million per season for a long term I would trade him as he's not worth that money advanced stats and all.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

My hope now is Backlund signs a team friendly deal in and around $5M per for 4-5 years.

That is not a team friendly deal. He's going to be 29 when that contract kicks in and his best hockey behind him. He's hit 50 points once in his career and likely never hits it again. That would be a nightmare contract for a player that's projecting to be a 3rd line center in a few years.

[Love]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

That is not a team friendly deal. He's going to be 29 when that contract kicks in and his best hockey behind him. He's hit 50 points once in his career and likely never hits it again. That would be a nightmare contract.

Interesting take

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

That is not a team friendly deal. He's going to be 29 when that contract kicks in and his best hockey behind him. He's hit 50 points once in his career and likely never hits it again. That would be a nightmare contract for a player that's projecting to be a 3rd line center in a few years.

Based on comparable it would be team friendly for sure.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Based on comparable it would be team friendly for sure.

Name the comparables with the contract starting close to 30 years old. We have seen the market shift to paying players in their prime years of 23-27 years old and this contract goes against that and is the same sort of overpayment we see on July 1st for players past their peak earning big contract for past performance. I can live with a $5 x 4 year deal at the absolute most and even at that it will be sad to see Backlund as a whipping boy in the last year or two of that deal as when the team struggles to keep their other young players fans are going to eyeball that deal as an albatross.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

That is not a team friendly deal. He's going to be 29 when that contract kicks in and his best hockey behind him. He's hit 50 points once in his career and likely never hits it again. That would be a nightmare contract for a player that's projecting to be a 3rd line center in a few years.

I think when looking at some Swedes historically their NHL prime is 30-35. Look at the Twins, Naslund, Lindstrom. Backlund at 5x5 is a fine contract.

If you think he needs to take less you should have been a proponent of trading him at the draft when his was quite high.

[Love]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Nobody has said that he MUST be traded. My issue is that you cannot commit long terms to players like Backlund who is peaked or close to peaking. The guy will be 29 years old next year and it's safe to say last season or this season will likely be his career seasons and he's going to start slowly tapering down into his 30's. Flames will basically be overpaying him into his 30's and I simply don't see a guy that's going to be a 40-50 point player in a few years. I look at what the Penguins did with Jordan Staal who is a similar player to Backlund. They cut bait rather than overpay him for a long term and it was clearly the right move. His current deal with the Hurricanes is horrible and the Flames would be staring at the same mistake.

I realize that fans get attached to players but you simply cannot keep everyone in a salary capped league and some times the least popular decisions with fans are the best decisions. I would rather keep Hamonic and/or Brodie than attach my wagon to Backlund long term. I have no idea what term or money the Backlund camp is looking but if I'm the GM I would be offering him $4 million per season over 5 years if he wants the term because I know he's not going to be better than a $4 million player over the next five seasons. Even at that I'm not very comfortable handing him a contract that takes him to 34 years old.

I think they get a deal done but if the asking price is around $5 million per season for a long term I would trade him as he's not worth that money advanced stats and all.

Are you really trying to make the comparison between a Penguins team with two generational centers to us?

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Name the comparables with the contract starting close to 30 years old. We have seen the market shift to paying players in their prime years of 23-27 years old and this contract goes against that and is the same sort of overpayment we see on July 1st for players past their peak earning big contract for past performance.

Frans Nielson signed last summer, and as they were talking on the radio he is probably the closest comparable. Signed 6 years 5.25 million but was older than Backlund.

He would get 6 or 7 years as a UFA for sure I would think.

[Love]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

I think when looking at some Swedes historically their NHL prime is 30-35. Look at the Twins, Naslund, Lindstrom. Backlund at 5x5 is a fine contract.

If you think he needs to take less you should have been a proponent of trading him at the draft when his was quite high.

5x5 is more than just a "fine contract". 5x5 is a ####ing steal.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Frans Nielson signed last summer, and as they were talking on the radio he is probably the closest comparable. Signed 6 years 5.25 million but was older than Backlund.

That's a bad team going nowhere and that's a bad contract.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Name the comparables with the contract starting close to 30 years old. We have seen the market shift to paying players in their prime years of 23-27 years old and this contract goes against that and is the same sort of overpayment we see on July 1st for players past their peak earning big contract for past performance.

Frans Nelson signed a 6 year deal at $5.5M per last year and was over 30 at the time. Bad deal for the Wings because they suck but talk to the Islanders who missed the playoffs last year and they will tell you he is sorely missed

Look how much Lucic, Ladd, and Eriksson got last summer.

Not saying the Flames should be signing Backlund to one of these deals but a team out there certainly will.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Love

Are you really trying to make the comparison between a Penguins team with two generational centers to us?

I'm using the Penguins as an example of a team that made the right call. I'm looking at the Hurricanes as the comparison to the Flames. How is that deal looking for them?

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Love

5x5 is more than just a "fine contract". 5x5 is a ####ing steal.

I don't think so. A 50pt second liner signed for $5M in his 30's is not a steal. He earns the money for the ability to play against top competition but he has one season with good numbers offensively.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Frans Nelson signed a 6 year deal at $5.5M per last year and was over 30 at the time. Bad deal for the Wings because they suck but talk to the Islanders who missed the playoffs last year and they will tell you he is sorely missed

Look how much Lucic, Ladd, and Eriksson got last summer.

Not saying the Flames should be signing Backlund to one of these deals but a team out there certainly will.

All horrible contracts. You see the theme here?

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Trading Backlund for a RW puts us right back to having the worst collection of Cs in the division.

Backlund is a great player and if we trade him, it will almost certainly be for pieces that are less valuable

It absolutely boggles my mind how fans want to trade players the moment they become good. Backlund is a key piece and, with the style he plays, he should continue to be a key piece for at least 3 or 4 years.

The whole point of acquiring good players is to build a team. We have a team for the next 3 to 5 years (at least). Let's try to win with it,instead of trading it for more future parts.

People just remember how quickly can a player's game drop off... Take Hudler, Wideman, Hiller, or Bouma that looked great in the 2014-15 season. It is easy to see why people are cautious to overcommiting to a player. I know I used extreme examples but you get the point.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Nobody has said that he MUST be traded. My issue is that you cannot commit long terms to players like Backlund who is peaked or close to peaking. The guy will be 29 years old next year and it's safe to say last season or this season will likely be his career seasons and he's going to start slowly tapering down into his 30's. Flames will basically be overpaying him into his 30's and I simply don't see a guy that's going to be a 40-50 point player in a few years. I look at what the Penguins did with Jordan Staal who is a similar player to Backlund. They cut bait rather than overpay him for a long term and it was clearly the right move. His current deal with the Hurricanes is horrible and the Flames would be staring at the same mistake.

I realize that fans get attached to players but you simply cannot keep everyone in a salary capped league and some times the least popular decisions with fans are the best decisions. I would rather keep Hamonic and/or Brodie than attach my wagon to Backlund long term. I have no idea what term or money the Backlund camp is looking but if I'm the GM I would be offering him $4 million per season over 5 years if he wants the term because I know he's not going to be better than a $4 million player over the next five seasons. Even at that I'm not very comfortable handing him a contract that takes him to 34 years old.

I think they get a deal done but if the asking price is around $5 million per season for a long term I would trade him as he's not worth that money advanced stats and all.

Backlund provides way more value to the team than either of those players. Sometimes it's about assessing who is part of the team's motor and who isn't. Backlund is a vital piece to this team's success because he elevates everyone around him. Sure, he might regress a little skill-wise, but his hockey IQ is what makes him effective, and that won't disappear overnight.

He's definitely worth $5 million a season. The Flames would be foolish to balk at that price.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Backlund provides way more value to the team than either of those players. Sometimes it's about assessing who is part of the team's motor and who isn't. Backlund is a vital piece to this team's success because he elevates everyone around him. Sure, he might regress a little skill-wise, but his hockey IQ is what makes him effective, and that won't disappear overnight.

He's definitely worth $5 million a season. The Flames would be foolish to balk at that price.

I trade Backlund all day before I trade Brodie. Not even close imo who is more valuable and itnis the Dman. Haven't watched enough Hamonic to comment on he vs Backlund

I also have more faith in Bennett or Jankowski being able to be our 2/3centrea than I do Valimaki, or Kylington being a top 4 Dman