Who do the Flames protect in the Expansion Draft?

[Geeoff]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

Oh, that's wonderful news then! Tantrum averted.

I think he was literally 1 game away from having to be protected.

Anyway, I think they would expose Hanifin before Valimaki.

And let's say the Flames have Hanifin and Mangiapane exposed, that's actually a tough decision for Seattle depending on what they get from other teams

[rumy]

It would be awesome if you were able to put up a poll in this thread, similar to Bingo’s Prospect Ranking Poll, for users to vote on what players to protect. Have exactly which players can be selected and which can’t (Valamaki?, etc.). Would be very interesting to see what CP decides…

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

I think he was literally 1 game away from having to be protected.

Anyway, I think they would expose Hanifin before Valimaki.

And let's say the Flames have Hanifin and Mangiapane exposed, that's actually a tough decision for Seattle depending on what they get from other teams

All else equal, it's an easy decision, IMO (Hanifin).

But they have to balance all picks, and if there are a bunch of good defensemen, then maybe they look at the forward.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Right ...

But the original suggestion that you countered was that he wanted to see that trio together for a full season.

They were together for 1/3 of the season.

I would agree on duos, but that wasn't what they suggested.

If you want the apples to apples comparison it's 55% for Tkachuk/Backlund and 40% for Mangipane/Backlund. Still well under the 84% seen from a duo that spent the whole year together.

Well, your inference that they only played a third of the season together is not quite right either though. You can’t dispute that
- three of the four quarters, 11’s top linemates were 19 and 88. Fact
- the second quarter, it was still the second most common. Fact

I think if you go back to your game takes you will find that they absolutely played together more than 24 games (which can be taken as the inference when you say a third of the season). Far more. I really don’t think you can argue otherwise

And comparing to Monahan and Gaudreau is not comparing to regular linemates, it is comparing to a duo with an unusually high proportion of time paired. Think also about when the coaches break out the blender. How often did the blending involve splitting those two up? Very rare

Then you have stuff like penalties as well. Gaudreau and Monahan are rarely penalized. Tkachuk takes at least, what, 50 minutes more than those guys? Some majors, some misconducts, some coincidentals in the mix, and Backlund has to play with someone

I don’t know, Bingo. I know that as a group, all three were together for 35 percent of the time, but the idea that they only played a third of the season together is not exactly in line with the lineup cards

Also they spent twice the time together than the next closest trio

35.5 % - Backlund, Tkachuk, Mang
17% - Backlund, Monahan, Gaudreau - yes, this experiment lasted longer than I recalled
12.% - Backlund, Tkachuk, Frolik

That’s only 64 percent of the time accounted for
And the rest of the combinations were numerous, and 3% or less

Fun fact . The next most frequent line?
3% - Backlund, Dube, Monahan - Who would have guessed that?


Yeah. Anyways, no, they didn’t play together just a third of the season by count of games. No way.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I agree with all those things, and don't think he is under-rated as you suggest. Certainly not by me anyway.

But we aren't talking about what Backlund has done for the past 4 or 5 years here. Nor are we talking about next season. We are talking about the 2 seasons after that, when he will be 32 and 33 years old (34 by the end of the 2nd season). And he will still be making $5.35M per. When signed, that was a great deal. It is still a great deal. Will it be a great deal in 2 years? I am not so sure.

Here are Backlund's PPG by year:

2012: 0.268
2013: 0.500
2014: 0.513
2015: 0.519
2016: 0.573
2017: 0.654
2018: 0.549
2019: 0.610
2020: 0.643

He improved every year until 2016/17 when he peaked at .654 PPG. And that is when he signed his nice 6 year, $32.1M contract.

Can he put up 0.6 PPG again this year? I expect he will.

Can he put up 0.6 PPG in the following 2 years? Sadly, it is very likely that he won't. As the points drop, the value for the contract drops. It is the way it goes with age.

So the question isn't whether we can replace Backlund NOW for $5.35M, the question is whether we can replace 32 year old, declining offence Backlund, for $5.35M.

It isn't a slight against the player. It is a simple fact that we all get older.

Well, there is a lot more to the .643 in 2019-20

Backlund’s production last year was
First 35 games: 14 points = .4 ppg
Last 35 games: 31 points = .89 ppg

Including
Last 16 games: 22 points = 1.375 ppg

So what is Backlund capable of?

That last half of the season is a meaningful sample that doesn’t look like a guy that peaked years ago, sitting on his fat contract, and sadly unlikely to be able to muster .6 ppg

He was a damn beast down the stretch. Playing the best hockey of his career. Indisputably

[Nelson]

Originally Posted by Dajazz

Backlund is so underrated on CP, he’s a bonafide 2nd line centre by all metrics and a defensive stalwart who’s always just outside the top Selke voting.

I haven’t seen him slow down at all, he’s getting better each year. Smarter, stronger and meaner.

Gio had a rough year, will he rebound? If not I’m guessing Treliving will have a long hard look at him and that contract. If Valimaki pans out, Andersson/Hanifin takes another step and Tanev (shudder) is that top 4 anchor... well. Tough decisions.

I don't think anyone would disagree with you about what Backlund currently is. I certainly don't. But you have to try to make an educated guess at future regression because father time is undefeated. Plus, you also have to consider his salary, the salaries of Mangiapane/Dube/Bennett, how much longer Mangiapane/Dube/Bennett will provide good value compared to Backlund, and Mangiapane's/Dube's/Bennett's potential to improve.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Well, there is a lot more to the .643 in 2019-20

Backlund’s production last year was
First 35 games: 14 points = .4 ppg
Last 35 games: 31 points = .89 ppg

Including
Last 16 games: 22 points = 1.375 ppg

So what is Backlund capable of?

That last half of the season is a meaningful sample that doesn’t look like a guy that peaked years ago, sitting on his fat contract, and sadly unlikely to be able to muster .6 ppg

He was a damn beast down the stretch. Playing the best hockey of his career. Indisputably

Guys get hot. And they get cold. That's why we use larger samples. You can't take the points per game from a 16 , or even a 35 game stretch and infer that it represents their potential production.

Over the last 4 years, he has been a .613 guy. That is what he is.

How long can he remain on that plateau? Time will tell.

[Dajazz]

Originally Posted by Nelson

I don't think anyone would disagree with you about what Backlund currently is. I certainly don't. But you have to try to make an educated guess at future regression because father time is undefeated. Plus, you also have to consider his salary, the salaries of Mangiapane/Dube/Bennett, how much longer Mangiapane/Dube/Bennett will provide good value compared to Backlund, and Mangiapane's/Dube's/Bennett's potential to improve.

I guess my point is that he’ll stand the test of time quite well. If Bennett would live up to his draft status we’d be in a completely different situation, but right now Backlund looks like he’s our 2nd best centre for the next 2-3 years.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

...Yeah. Anyways, no, they didn’t play together just a third of the season by count of games. No way.

Right, but that line was also not "pretty much set all year" as you had originally claimed. I think the point stands that it will be preferable to see all three of them together for the full season.

[AC]

Yeah it was the Frolik exodus that opened the spot for Mangiapane on that new 3M line.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1291119695165157376

[Nelson]

Originally Posted by Dajazz

I guess my point is that he’ll stand the test of time quite well. If Bennett would live up to his draft status we’d be in a completely different situation, but right now Backlund looks like he’s our 2nd best centre for the next 2-3 years.

I think your position is reasonable. Sometimes reasonable people can disagree. This might be one of those situations.

[Dajazz]

Originally Posted by Nelson

I think your position is reasonable. Sometimes reasonable people can disagree. This might be one of those situations.

Agree to disagree is probably one of the best way to foster creative thinking

[Funkhouser]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

Losing Valimaki because of CSEC doing CSEC things (sentimentality protection spot on Gio) could plausibly happen and therefore I am now enraged thinking about it.

We can't lose Valimaki, he is exempt.

For all this hand wringing on keeping Gio over Kylington, Gio is presently at worst a #2D. I think it is likely that he will remain a viable option for the top 4 for another 3-4 years, and would likely do so at a reasonably low salary and high flexibility (a la Chara) when his current contract expires. Kylington may never be a top 4 D-man.

Depending on what we see this year, I think it would be silly to expose a top 4 D-man who is likely to give the club contract flexibility over the next 3-4 years just to protect a younger D man who MAY be a middle 6 and likely has little loyalty to the club and will want to maximize his earnings over the next few years. Just because he is young, doesn't mean he will be better, or cheaper than Gio...

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by AC

Yeah it was the Frolik exodus that opened the spot for Mangiapane on that new 3M line.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1291119695165157376

Reminds me of Glencross and Ferland in 2015

[Dan403]

Originally Posted by TheSquatch

Well, I'll say it, I'd leave Giordano and Gaudreau unprotected.

Gio is trending down, the last years of his contract are going to be poorer value as they go. He had an okay year, but he's just not the dominant defender he once was.

Gaudreau I just think we can replace or fill in for. It's been a long time since we saw Johnny Hockey. We have Johnny Nothanks right now, and at 6.9 or whatever he's at... yeah we need more production.

Leave Johnny Unprotected?

That is Chiarelli level bad.

Bad Take is soo really catastrophically Bad.

[Enoch Root]

aaaand we've jumped the shark

[Roof-Daddy]

Lol.

Leave Gaudreau unprotected?

There are bad takes, and then there are baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad takes.

That one takes the cake.

[Gaskal]

"I want to extract zero value out of Johnny and let him walk for free"

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

"I want to extract zero value out of Johnny and let him walk for free"

Duh. Addition by subtraction.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Well, your inference that they only played a third of the season together is not quite right either though. You can’t dispute that
- three of the four quarters, 11’s top linemates were 19 and 88. Fact
- the second quarter, it was still the second most common. Fact

I think if you go back to your game takes you will find that they absolutely played together more than 24 games (which can be taken as the inference when you say a third of the season). Far more. I really don’t think you can argue otherwise

And comparing to Monahan and Gaudreau is not comparing to regular linemates, it is comparing to a duo with an unusually high proportion of time paired. Think also about when the coaches break out the blender. How often did the blending involve splitting those two up? Very rare

Then you have stuff like penalties as well. Gaudreau and Monahan are rarely penalized. Tkachuk takes at least, what, 50 minutes more than those guys? Some majors, some misconducts, some coincidentals in the mix, and Backlund has to play with someone

I don’t know, Bingo. I know that as a group, all three were together for 35 percent of the time, but the idea that they only played a third of the season together is not exactly in line with the lineup cards

Also they spent twice the time together than the next closest trio

35.5 % - Backlund, Tkachuk, Mang
17% - Backlund, Monahan, Gaudreau - yes, this experiment lasted longer than I recalled
12.% - Backlund, Tkachuk, Frolik

That’s only 64 percent of the time accounted for
And the rest of the combinations were numerous, and 3% or less

Fun fact . The next most frequent line?
3% - Backlund, Dube, Monahan - Who would have guessed that?


Yeah. Anyways, no, they didn’t play together just a third of the season by count of games. No way.

Honestly don't know what to add.

I'm not all that fussed about 1/3 or 40% or half.

The guy that brought it up said he wanted to see that line for a full year, you said they basically were together a full year, and I think I've done a pretty good job in suggesting that wasn't true.