Re-sign Backlund Thread

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by transplant99

No it wont.

Just like it won't for next season?

Truly no fans in this league are as worried about the cap, which has not been an issue for this team for a long time, than Flames fans.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

This isn't the sunk cost effect. GMs have shelf lives. You ideally make the best moves for the long term health of this organization.

But the Flames have already gone all in on this season. We have no draft picks in the first 3 rounds. We aren't pulling out a month before the deadline. It just doesn't happen.

If you don't think trading our 1st round pick doesn't matter, then I don't know what else to say.

Then letting Backlund walk with no return cannot be allowed to happen...you are arguing against yourself.

We arent trading the 1st rounder...its already been traded. Doesnt matter any more, and hasnt since the day that deal was made.

[Ashasx]

You completely misread that post, but no surprise.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Just like it won't for next season?

Truly no fans in this league are as worried about the cap, which has not been an issue for this team for a long time, than Flames fans.

Expansion fees are not part of HRR, therefor Seattle joining has zero effect on the salary cap.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

You completely misread that post, but no surprise.

I get it...you are smarter than everyone else...just ask you.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Expansion fees are not part of HRR, therefor Seattle joining has zero effect on the salary cap.

I get that, but that doesn't mean Vegas won't have a significant impact on next year's salary cap, which is projected to increase significantly. The same thing will happen with Seattle.

[Vinny01]

Flames losing Backlund for nothing, in addition to moving multiple high picks is poor asset management as well. If this is only going to be a team that fights for a wildcard spot with Backlund then he should be traded.

Moving multiple high picks for Hamonic and then losing Backlund for nothing leaves the Flames with a huge hole to fill and minimal assets to do it. If they can swap Backs for a 1st and 2nd thst would give them more chips to improve the team. They could part with a top prospect if they are restocking the cupboards.

All in all a reasonable extension is the clear preference

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Expansion fees are not part of HRR, therefor Seattle joining has zero effect on the salary cap.

I'm not smarter than everybody else, I'm just not focused on issues that aren't actual problems for this team.

I don't want Backlund to walk. I want to-resign him because he is that important for the competitive viability of this team. He's important for this season, and many beyond because we have nothing internally to replace him now or in the future.

[MacDaddy77]

flames should only trade from their strengths which is Defense and possibly Goaltending.

If anyone is getting traded I can see Brodie and/or Stone being moved at the deadline for wing help.

Has Rittich shown enough for a team to trade a high pick for him if injury happens to a starter?

Next year 2 of Anderson, Klyington Fox or Valimaki need to make roster then.

Centre depth isn't a strength on this team how can you trade away your #2 centre?

[Erick Estrada]

I don't think Treliving's job is on the line. The owners just extended him so it's highly unlikely they fire him this offseason or next. He will get at least one more coach hire so he can afford to keep an eye on the future of the team.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

The Flames are simply not going to trade Backlund when the Islanders have our 1st round pick.

This team has no shot at the playoffs without him.

Really? If our playoff hopes rest on a center with 9 goals, who is the team worst minus forward (for active players), and is the worst center in the faceoff dot, then this team is not worthy of the post-season. Backlund is over-rated by a lot of Flames fans, but man, you're take it to a new level. You're infatuation with Backlund has reach David Jones/The Scorpion levels. The performance that Backlund has delivered this season is not one that makes or breaks the fortunes of the hockey club. Backlund has not been driving the play. Backlund is a support player, and he's playing like one. The Flames will survive without Backlund and very likely find themselves in the exact same predicament if he's here or not.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by MacDaddy77

flames should only trade from their strengths which is Defense and possibly Goaltending.

If anyone is getting traded I can see Brodie and/or Stone being moved at the deadline for wing help.

Has Rittich shown enough for a team to trade a high pick for him if injury happens to a starter?

Next year 2 of Anderson, Klyington Fox or Valimaki need to make roster then.

Centre depth isn't a strength on this team how can you trade away your #2 centre?

Because he, as it stands today, can go where ever he likes on July 1, and the Flames could be left holding a goodie bag that has absolutely nothing in it. That cannot happen....in any scenario other than if they keep him, they are almost assured of a deep run in the post season.

With him, they look far from that now which then gives you pause to ask a simple question.

If they are nothing more than a bubble team with him, then exactly how much value does he provide to allow you to keep him with no certainty he will be back next year?

Obviously the preferred scenario is that he signs an extension before the deadline and this whole topic goes away. However, there HAS to be a contingency plan if he doesn't and that is a deal to recoup some draft picks which he will easily return.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

"The rise of Jankowski"?

People think Jankowski is anywhere close right now to perform even a quarter of Backlund's role?

A quarter of Backlund's role? How about ALL of it? Jankowski is better in the face-off dot. He's a more skilled player and would probably benefit from playing with better players. He's jumped up to become the team's best penalty killer. He's big, is starting to throw his weight around, and just gets his role at both ends of the ice. I would say that Jankowski, given opportunity, would make people forget about Backlund quite quickly. He's just a better hockey player.

You guys simply either don't appreciate or understand the role that Backlund plays on this team.

Or maybe you just grossly over-rate Backlund's contribution to this team? Has that crossed your mind? Obviously management doesn't share your view, otherwise they would have backed up the Brinks truck and signed Backlund to an extension by now.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by New Era

Really? If our playoff hopes rest on a center with 9 goals, who is the team worst minus forward (for active players), and is the worst center in the faceoff dot, then this team is not worthy of the post-season. Backlund is over-rated by a lot of Flames fans, but man, you're take it to a new level. You're infatuation with Backlund has reach David Jones/The Scorpion levels. The performance that Backlund has delivered this season is not one that makes or breaks the fortunes of the hockey club. Backlund has not been driving the play. Backlund is a support player, and he's playing like one. The Flames will survive without Backlund and very likely find themselves in the exact same predicament if he's here or not.

How many times have you argued with me over these items, how many times do you need to be proven wrong, while you continue to post stats like +/- or FO% like they are defining characteristics of a good or bad hockey player.

Backlund is an elite defensive player. If you think otherwise, you are wrong. He makes life easier for Monahan who would drown if he was expected to face the opposition's top players every night, or was expected to take as many defensive draws as Backlund.

Backlund has done all this while being 50 point player these last few years. He's on pace to score that many this season.

Trading him will absolutely gut this team.

Originally Posted by New Era

A quarter of Backlund's role? How about ALL of it? Jankowski is better in the face-off dot. He's a more skilled player and would probably benefit from playing with better players. He's jumped up to become the team's best penalty killer. He's big, is starting to throw his weight around, and just gets his role at both ends of the ice. I would say that Jankowski, given opportunity, would make people forget about Backlund quite quickly. He's just a better hockey player.

That you think Jankowski can perform Backlund's role, coupled with your past opinions, tells me all I need to know about your hockey knowledge.

[Beninho]

If they aren't going to re-sign Backlund or think it will be difficult they need to get at least something for him at the deadline. Backlund is a very good player but I don't think he puts us over the top to a team that actually is contending. Right now this team is a dark horse for the cup and trading Backlund isn't like we are trading a critical piece of cup contender. Backlund hasn't been as good as last year and I do feel that the offense on the second line is being driven by Tkachuk. Backlund needs to be re-signed or traded at the deadline, this team can't lose assets for nothing especially after giving up so many picks.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Because he, as it stands today, can go where ever he likes on July 1, and the Flames could be left holding a goodie bag that has absolutely nothing in it. That cannot happen....in any scenario other than if they keep him, they are almost assured of a deep run in the post season.

With him, they look far from that now which then gives you pause to ask a simple question.

If they are nothing more than a bubble team with him, then exactly how much value does he provide to allow you to keep him with no certainty he will be back next year?

Obviously the preferred scenario is that he signs an extension before the deadline and this whole topic goes away. However, there HAS to be a contingency plan if he doesn't and that is a deal to recoup some draft picks which he will easily return.

The Flames could trade Brodie in the offseason for more than they'll get for Backlund at the deadline.

If you trade Backlund, you're blowing a gigantic hole in the core of your team, and you're signalling that you've given up. You can't expect to go on a run without him, he starts 60% of his shifts in the defensive zone. I don't care if he's not great at faceoffs - he and Tkachuk have turned Troy Brouwer into 0.5 PPG player since he replaced Frolik (Or at least in the last 8 games, I don't recall how long Frolik's been out for).

Originally Posted by Beninho

If they aren't going to re-sign Backlund or think it will be difficult they need to get at least something for him at the deadline. Backlund is a very good player but I don't think he puts us over the top to a team that actually is contending. Right now this team is a dark horse for the cup and trading Backlund isn't like we are trading a critical piece of cup contender. Backlund hasn't been as good as last year and I do feel that second line is being driven by Tkachuk. Just can't let Backlund go for nothing

This is what removing Backlund does:

Gaudreau-Monahan-Ferland
Tkachuk-Jankowski-Frolik
Mangiapane-Bennett-Hathaway
Hrivik-Stajan-Brouwer
Lazar

Backlund's not a critical piece? You want to go into the playoffs with a #2 centre with 15 career points and Sam Bennett as your #3?

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

The Flames could trade Brodie in the offseason for more than they'll get for Backlund at the deadline.

If you trade Backlund, you're blowing a gigantic hole in the core of your team, and you're signalling that you've given up. You can't expect to go on a run without him, he starts 60% of his shifts in the defensive zone. I don't care if he's not great at faceoffs - he and Tkachuk have turned Troy Brouwer into 0.5 PPG player since he replaced Frolik (Or at least in the last 8 games, I don't recall how long Frolik's been out for).

First of all I do not consider Backlund a "core" part of this team. Above average defensively, average to below average offensively, oft injured though not recently, does not scream to me as a guy you build around...which is how you define a core piece. A great support player? Absolutely. Someone I would prefer they keep at the right price? Without question. Not a guy you alter the rest of your lineup for however, and certainly not someone you just let walk for nothing when you can turn him into other assets.

If you dont trade Backlund and they miss the playoffs and he walks for nothing...tell me what a Brodie return means then?

(And i disagree you would get more for Brodie than Backlund...entirely, but that has nothing to do with what is being discussed)

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

The Flames could trade Brodie in the offseason for more than they'll get for Backlund at the deadline.

If you trade Backlund, you're blowing a gigantic hole in the core of your team, and you're signalling that you've given up. You can't expect to go on a run without him, he starts 60% of his shifts in the defensive zone. I don't care if he's not great at faceoffs - he and Tkachuk have turned Troy Brouwer into 0.5 PPG player since he replaced Frolik (Or at least in the last 8 games, I don't recall how long Frolik's been out for).



This is what removing Backlund does:

Gaudreau-Monahan-Ferland
Tkachuk-Jankowski-Frolik
Mangiapane-Bennett-Hathaway
Hrivik-Stajan-Brouwer
Lazar

Backlund's not a critical piece? You want to go into the playoffs with a #2 centre with 15 career points and Sam Bennett as your #3?

You're pruposefully omitting whatever roster player comes in via trade when Backlund is moved.

I get it, there's going to be some very staunch blind defense of keeping Backlund. Hudlers trade deadline created the same environment.

Backlund may re-sign, he may not. But I think we can all agree that letting Backlund walk for nothing if that's the way things turn, is the worst possible outcome the team can endure.

You and Ashax not arguing with a bunch of WhereRUChrisOsullivans, majority of us here know what Backlund is. Not one person is saying he sucks. And when the business side of hockey comes into play, it doesn't matter how much a player is loved by fans, they're going to do what's best for the team.

[Ashasx]

Defensive zone starts:
Monahan: 41.9% (lowest of any regular on the team)
Jankowski: 42.2% (second lowest of any regular on the team)
Backlund: 57.1%

How do you guys think Monahan and Jankowski will perform with that increased responsibility? They already face the easiest zone starts on the team. How will they perform when they are expected to undertake the toughest?

That is Backlund's value.

[Beninho]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

The Flames could trade Brodie in the offseason for more than they'll get for Backlund at the deadline.

If you trade Backlund, you're blowing a gigantic hole in the core of your team, and you're signalling that you've given up. You can't expect to go on a run without him, he starts 60% of his shifts in the defensive zone. I don't care if he's not great at faceoffs - he and Tkachuk have turned Troy Brouwer into 0.5 PPG player since he replaced Frolik (Or at least in the last 8 games, I don't recall how long Frolik's been out for).



This is what removing Backlund does:

Gaudreau-Monahan-Ferland
Tkachuk-Jankowski-Frolik
Mangiapane-Bennett-Hathaway
Hrivik-Stajan-Brouwer
Lazar

Backlund's not a critical piece? You want to go into the playoffs with a #2 centre with 15 career points and Sam Bennett as your #3?

I'd have to agree with the poster above and argue that you would hope the Flames would get back a player that would help bolster the lineup. Losing Backlund sucks but if this team can't re-sign him they need to get something for him. I'm not encouraging the Flames to trade him but imagine losing him for nothing in the offseason.